Ube Tllniversttg ot Cbicago 

FouNoeo av john o. •tocKer'CLL.cR 



ji Experimental and Introspective 
Study of the Human Learning 
Process in the Maze 



A DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED TO THE FACUI,T\' 

OF THE 

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND LITERATURE 

IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE 01 

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 

(department OF PSYCHOLOGY) 



% 



FLEMING ALLEN CLAY PERRIN 



(Published as No. 70 of the Psychological Review Monograph 



LB 1051 
.P4 
Zopy 1 



Ube TUniversit^ of Cbicaoo 

FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 



An Experimental and Introspective 

Study of the Human Learning 

Process in the Maze 



A DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY 
OF THE 

graduate school of arts and literature 

in candidacy for the degree of 

doctor of philosophy 

(department of psychology) 



BY 

FLEMING ALLEN CLAY PERRIN 



(Published as No. 70 of the Psychological Review Monographs) 






b'\ 



Ta 



it^j'j 




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

My sincere thanks are due to Professor James Rowland Angell 
and to Dr. Harvey A. Carr for their advice and suggestions 
during the course of the experimentation, and to the twelve sub- 
jects who gave both time and patience to the learning of the 
mazes. 



I. INTRODUCTION 

The incentive to the experimentation reported in this paper 
was an interest in the problem of correlating human and animal 
learning behavior. The most obvious and direct method of ap- 
proaching such a correlation is by way of an objective test that 
will elicit similar reactions from the animal and the human being. 
The maze was suggested to me as the most convenient laboratory 
device for that purpose. Whatever may be the merits of the 
maze test, it at least affords a basis for a comparison of the 
activities of an inclusive range of animal types. 

The dearth of published accounts dealing with the normal 
human adult reactions in the maze led me to believe that the 
investigations should be initiated in that practically untried field. 
Such a series of tests promised, in the first place, a set of learning 
curves that would invite speculative comparison with the animal 
maze curves obtained by Watson, Carr, and others. In the sec- 
ond place, the project suggested the possibility of interesting 
introspective results. The question of whether or no the sub- 
jective phases could be utilized for immediate purposes of cor- 
relation was thought to be entirely beside the point. I assumed 
that the objective results of a learning process which involved 
conscious functions could be explained adequately only in terms 
of those functions. Accordingly, the introspective reports have 
received the larger share of the emphasis, in conducting the 
experiments as well as in formulating the results. 

The present investigation purports to be nothing more than a 
preliminary study of the general problem. It was begun in the 
hope that it would include an attempt at the correlation men- 
tioned; it was finished after having submitted to laboratory test 
only the more obvious questions suggested by the title. 

I have omitted the customary bibliography from this paper. 
The list of references bearing directly upon the subject is ex- 
ceedingly meagre, and an attempt to give a complete bibliography 
of the learning process would scarcely be warranted in an account 



2 F. A. C. PERRIN 

of a very limited investigation of one phase of tlie topic. An 
excellent list is given by Ellison [Ped. Sem., 1909], and a more 
extensive one is furnished by the Clark University, "Bibliogra- 
phies of Experimental Pedagogy". 

II. EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 

The experiments which furnished the material for this dis- 
cussion were begun in the fall of 1909 and were continued 
through three academic years. All of the work was done in the 
psychological laboratory at the University of Chicago, with the 
exception of Experiment II. The mazes employed in the labora- 
tory were designed by the experimenter, and were constructed 
by the technician of the department. Two types of maze were 
used — the pencil maze, and one through which the sub- 
ject walked. A number of different pencil mazes were employed, 
which are described in the respective accounts of the different 
experiments. 

The subjects were all adults, either graduate students or 
members of the faculty in the departments of psychology and 
philosophy. Throughout all the experiments they were blind- 
folded while learning the different mazes. The learning was 
by trials, and after each trial were recorded, (i), time, taken 
by the stop-watch, (2), errors, (3), description of behavior, 
(4), detailed introspection. The subject was each time asked 
to give as complete an introspection as possible, and was then 
quizzed by the experimenter. 

The following served as subjects : Professor J. R. Angell, 
Dr. J. W. Hayes, Dr. Mary H. S. Hayes, Dr. Grace M. Fer- 
nald, Dr. Mabel R. Fernald, Dr. Ethel M. Chamberlain Porter, 
Miss Sarah M. Ritter, Dr. H. F. Adams, Dr. W. S. Hunter, 
Mr. R. B. Owen, Mr. E. W. Burgess, Miss Carrie Nicholson. 

The investigations comprised a series of four principal experi- 
ments, which are described below under the headings of Experi- 
ments I, II, III, IV. In connection with the first a series of 
supplementary tests was conducted which are referred to as 
Tests I, 2, 3, etc., and which are described at the close of our 
account of Experiment I. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 3 

A. EXPERIMENT I 

The maze used in this experiment is referred to as the "Nor- 
mal" maze, for two reasons : ( i ) , it is as exact a duplicate of the 
modified Hampton Court maze used by Watson and Carr with 
the white rat as practical convenience permitted; (2), it was the 
pencil maze employed in our endeavor to ascertain the general 
course of the learning process. All of the other mazes used, 
with the exception of the one described in Experiment II, were 
designed with reference to a study of special aspects of the 
learning process. 

I. Apparatus and Method 

(a) Description of maze: The maze consisted of a sequence 
of paths and cul-de-sacs in the form of grooves cut through a 
board 5/16 inch thick. The grooves were 1/2 inch in width, 
and the board was 16 by 24 inches in size. A diagram of the 
maze pattern, in correct proportions, is given [Fig. i.] on the 
opposite page, together with the numbers and letters used in 
our description to designate the various paths. 

The maze rested upon a base of plate glass, and between the 
two a sheet of paper was placed, so that as the subject traced 
through the path with a pencil, a permanent graph was pre- 
served on the paper of all his movements in the maze. The 
glass in turn rested upon a heavy table, upon which the whole 
apparatus was securely clamped, in a fixed position, marked out 
on the table. The subject sat in a straight-backed, comfortable 
chair during the trials, at a distance from the maze best suited 
to his ease and convenience. The starting box of the maze was 
directly in front of him, at a position approximately even with 
the mid-line of his body; the side BC of the maze was to his 
right. The position of the chair with reference to the maze 
and table remained constant throughout the experiment, and the 
position of the whole apparatus in the experimental room re- 
mained the same. 

(6) Method: Each subject made one trial a day, at a fixed 
time, for six days in the week. During the progress of the ex- 



PlW 



fUi 



00 



«9 



<n 



Un 



u 






«>* 



«v» 



P4 



o 



u 



l-O 



=M 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 5 

perimentation, various exigencies made a rigid adherence to 
the time schedule impossible. When these deviations from the 
routine procedure were responsible for discernible modifications 
in the learning process, the fact is noted in the discussion. With 
the exception of one subject only, not more than one trial per 
day was permitted each subject. 

For each trial, the subject came into the experimenter's room, 
where a screen prevented him from seeing the apparatus. He 
was seated, and blindfolded with a pad of black China silk 
stuffed with cotton, that effectually excluded all light. He was 
then led around the screen, seated at the table in front of the 
maze, and given a pencil, the point of which was placed in the 
starting box by the experimenter. 

The instructions and directions given each subject at the 
beginning of the first trial, to be observed for each trial, were 
as follows : ( i ) Hold the pencil in a position as nearly vertical 
as comfort will permit, and at the spoken signal, "start", en- 
deavor to find the exit by tracing, keeping the pencil-point in 
contact with the floor of the maze (i.e., the paper) until the trial 
is completed. (2) Hold the pencil in any natural way desirable, 
but do not let the hand or arm come in contact with the maze. 
(3) Absolute freedom is allowed as regards retracing, stopping 
in the maze in order to think, or to relieve fatigue. (4) Time 
is to be counted from the starting signal until the exit is reached. 
"Time out" will not be granted except for unforeseen exigencies. 
All errors are to be recorded. An error is defined as a false 
turn: e.g., turning into a cul-de-sac from the true path, making 
any turns inside the cul-de-sac except those involved in retracing 
towards the true path, making turns on the true path in a direc- 
tion away from the exit. (The subject of course learned to 
discriminate the true path from the false only as he made 
progress in the learning.) (5) Employ any learning technique 
available or desirable : that is, freedom is permitted each sub- 
ject as regards thought processes or distribution of attention. 
Speaking aloud during the trial is permitted, but the experi- 
menter will make no comment during the trial. In. general, each 
subject is to employ any technique consistent with the directions 



6 F. A. C. PERRIN 

given. (6) Subjects are not to think of the maze, or of learn- 
ing methods, or to communicate with each other on the subject 
between trials. (7) The maze will be considered learned when 
the subject is able to trace the shortest route, provided there is 
more than one, without error, for five trials in succession. 

2. Results obtained from Experiment I — analysis of 

THE learning PROCESS 

(a) General account of the objective behavior of the stibjects 
in the maze, a^nd of the nature of the learning process: It was 
obvious from the introspective reports of the first trial that the 
learning process was to be largely a conscious one. Each subject, 
without raising the question of the possibility of any other 
method, set about to develop an ideational control over the 
maze. Motor habits played an increasingly important role dur- 
ing the succeeding trials; and various subjects reported during 
the course of the experiment, that the pattern of certain seg- 
ments, which they had learned to run without error, had never 
been completely apprehended. But with these exceptions, the 
ability to run the maze, with a decreasing number of errors, 
developed with the ability to image the path, and to describe it 
verbally or graphically. 

As the blindfolded subject was engaged in the active task of 
exploring the maze with the pencil, he was the recipient of a 
definite sequence of kinaesthetic sensations, due to arm movement 
and strain, and cutaneous sensations, as the pencil tip was pushed 
along the side of the pathway, or was moved without contact 
with the sides, or was suddenly brought into contact with the 
end of a passage and stopped. This immediate sensory expe- 
rience, however, was reacted upon in a perceptual way. The 
subject's attention was, not on kinaesthetic and cutaneous sensa- 
tions as such, but upon pathways running in various directions, 
and the turns and branches of the pathways. 

The subject's reaction was not merely a perceptual one. The 
experience of paths and turns was immediately translated into 
image forms, of a nature and to an extent varying with the 
individual. Verbal processes were elicited, by way of description 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 7 

and comment. The subject set himself more or less actively to the 
task of discriminating true paths from the false, of retaining, 
out of the confusion of experiences, the memory of the true 
path ; of organizing his knowledge gained from each trial in such 
a way that it could be adequately applied to the succeeding trial, 
for the purpose of effective control over the task he had 
undertaken. 

(b) Summarised characterisation of behavior: The following 
brief description of the objective behavior throughout the exper- 
ment applies in general to each subject. The first two or three 
trials consisted in a seemingly aimless trying-out of paths that 
offered themselves, a performance that strongly suggested the 
efforts of a newly-caught animal to escape from a pen. After 
this period, the procedure was as follows: (a), a tendency to 
work over into the general course of the true path. In doing so, 
each subject entered various cul-de-sacs, to a decreasing extent 
as he made progress. He entered the cul-de-sacs directly by 
turning off the true path, evidently not being aware of the mis- 
take until he reached the blind end. The activity that followed 
in getting out of the cul-de-sac was very similar to that observed 
in the first few trials. It did not cease by any means when the 
true path was reached, (b) There was a very general tendency 
for the subject to enter the same cul-de-sac in this manner for 
several trials in succession, to drop it for a number of ensuing 
trials, and then to fall into it again for a time, (c) Most of the 
subjects, especially in the first half-dozen trials, would go repeated- 
ly to the end of such a long passage, as S for instance, mistake it 
for the blind ending of a cul-de-sac, and retrace, (d) The sub- 
jects early learned to stick to one side of the path in certain re- 
gions, for the purpose of avoiding dangerous places on the 
other side, or because they had learned that the first turn on the 
side followed was the correct turn in the path, (e) A general 
tendency was observed to increase the speed of the pencil move- 
ment, (i), in familiar and safe segments of the path; (2), in 
trial and error attempts to escape from cul-de-sacs, or at any 
time when the subject became hopelessly confused — not neces- 
sarily in cul-de-sacs. 



8 F. A. C. PERRIN 

The chief observable difference in the behavior of the subjects 
was in the matter of speed. E. C. P. and H. F. A. made the 
quickest movements; J. J. T. and G. M. F. moved the pencil 
very slowly. The other subjects in this respect ranged between 
these two extremes, each represented by two subjects. Each 
subject established the pace in the first trial that was consistently 
to characterize his behavior throughout the trials. 

(c) Summarised consensus of introspections: A brief gen- 
eral characterization of the subjective aspects of the learning 
process, based on unanimous testimony given by the subjects, 
will serve to introduce the more detailed individual introspective 
reports. They all state that the maze learning process took the 
form of discriminating and remembering a definite sequence 
of turns and paths from the confusion of experiences that char- 
acterized the first trials. Different turns and paths as they 
become learned acquired familiar cues, due to: (a), the feeling 
of arm position, as being extended towards the left part of the 
maze, the upper part, etc.; (b), kinaesthetic feelings of the 
length and direction of arm movement in traversing any one 
path; (c), a projected tactual feeling at the end of the pencil, 
as it turned corners and followed the paths. This element was 
slightly emphasized except in the case of J. W. H. ; (d), the 
image schema of the maze, as checked up by these various sense 
factors. 

The difficulty of organizing an adequate control knowledge 
of the true path may be ascribed to two causes: (a), the great 
initial difficulty, that decreased as the subject developed his con- 
trol, was a matter of memory. At any given time during a trial, 
the subject could remember fairly well the last consecutive -2-5 
turns and paths. But it was very hard to keep in mind the 
memory of the turns traversed earlier, (b) The second great 
difficulty was that of discrimination. The subject would proceed 
on what he was more or less sure was the true path, and would 
suddenly find himself at the blind ending of a cul-de-sac. He 
had no way of telling which one of the half dozen immediately 
preceding turns had led him off the true path, even if he were 
able to remember them. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 9 

After the first half dozen trials, the difficulties became lo- 
cated at two or three definite regions in the maze. The subjects 
had learned that certain segments were relatively free frorri 
dangerous situations, (e.g., A-F and P-T). The running of 
these segments became habitual, in the sense that while tra- 
versing them, the subject's attention was anticipatory, concerned 
with difficulties ahead. Motor habit, and the mechanical con- 
struction of the maze itself, were in this manner important fac- 
tors in the learning process. The habit element assumed an 
increasingly important role as the trials were continued. 

(d) Summarised reports of the individual subjects as re- 
gards the nature of the learning process: In the following re- 
ports, the data bearing upon the learning method have been 
abstracted from the complete introspections. 

(i) Subject H. F. A. At the completion of the first trial, 
he had a scheme of the path in mind that he represented by the 
drawing [Fig. 2]. He adopted in 
this trial, and followed consistently 
throughout the experiment, a work- 
ing method which he describes as 
that of "conscious trial and error". 



Each day he attempted to work over c-,^,,^^ ^ r. '■ r xt 

■' ^ JbiGURE 2. Drawing of Normal 

in the general direction he knew the Maze, end of first trial, H.F.A. 
path to extend, with the aid of the memory of such specific 
segments as he could retain. He would follow any given path 
to the end, the "bump". There he might or might not get a 
cue for the proper turn, a kinaesthetic memory experience. If he 
got it, and it turned out to be the correct one, well and good; 
if not, he would work around in haphazard fashion, and eventu- 
ally recover his bearings. He made no special attempt to reason 
out situations, or to formulate plans or theories. He did con- 
sciously attempt to discriminate and remember. He thinks 
he learned the maze, "as a rat learns it — assuming that it is 
conscious — by a trial and error method, and an associative 
memory control." Furthermore, he employed the same cues 
that a rat presumably utilizes — kinaesthetic and tactual 
experiences. 



10 F. A. C. PERRIN 

(2) Subject M. R. F. She purposely adopted on the start a 
trial and error method, but with this, in the first trial, and 
throughout the' ensuing trials, she assumed a decidedly rational, 
thinking attitude towards her task. She conceived the idea, 
(I),^ of exploring one side at a time, but it did not prove to be 
a sucecssful procedure. The results of trials (I-IV) were gen- 
eral orientation — the general spacial relations were learned first. 
Like H. F. A. (and other subjects) she was alertly on the lookout 
for familiar passages, but she made more elaborate anticipatory 
judgments and plans — ''The next time I reach this corner, I am 
going to turn north and see what happens." At (IV) she 
started out with the general working idea to eliminate useless 
movements. She planned, for instance, to avoid a "bad place" 
on the right by trying to find a new path around it. She thinks 
about the maze as she learns, in verbal terms, sometimes spoken 
aloud, such as : "Never went up here so far before ; yes, this 
is O. K. ; guess I'll try this path to-day." By trial (XVI) she 
believed there were four different paths in the maze; just how 
much is common route, she doesn't know. She thinks possibly 
the maze is being altered as she learns. (The experimenter was 
extremely careful in the preliminary directions to state that 
there might or might not be more than one true path. He 
made no mention of possible alterations during the learning.) 
The whole process was largely a series of discoveries and guesses. 
She used conscious exploration to check up her theories, but 
exploration almost inevitably resulted in getting hopelessly lost. 
In (XXII) she found herself in a familiar cul-de-sac, 6-9, and 
recognized it, but was sure she escaped from it by a new path. 
By (XXVIII) she is firmly convinced that there is more than 
one path — stated that while she used to come down a long path 
in the middle of the maze, (L), for the last three or four trials 
she has been entering it from the right, at a place much lower 
down than usual — that is, the path is perceptibly shorter than 
it formerly was. Therefore, she concluded, there are two ways 
of getting into it, and therefore two paths in the right part of 
the maze. She hit upon the idea of learning one of the paths in 

^ The Roman numerals in parentheses refer to the number of the trials. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION ii 

the maze, and letting the others go. At (XXXIII) she has 
the situation under control' — that is, she can go through one of 
her paths without error. At the conclusion of the experiment, she 
had not discovered the the nature of the other paths; but tech- 
nically the maze was learned. 

The reports of this subject present a distinct contrast to those 
of H. F. A. Her attitude was consistently a more rational one. 
She did more thinking about the problem. But she reports that 
practically her learning was by the method of trial and error, 
that the discoveries she made which were of vital importance 
were more or less accidently hit upon. 

(3) Subject E. C. P. This subject was our most consistent 
and exclusive visualizer, and her overt aim from the start was 
to build up a visual image of the maze path for the purpose of 
control. To the extent that she accomplished this, she made 
progress in the learning. In (I) she became conscious that she: 
was in the right side of the maze, and started to work over to the 
left. Her whole subjective process went on in terms of building- 
up and reconstructing this visual pattern. The general shape 
was developed first, i.e., (IV) "The path is of the form of the 
capital M." Her attitude was consistently one of active atten- 
tion, discrimination, and memorizing. At times she attempted 
to follow tentatively a few working ideas — like M. R. F., she 
attempted to "dodge" the cul-de-sac region on the right by 
trying to work around it. But she does not report much syste- 
matic thinking or planning. Her procedure was to go ahead, 
learn what she could by experience, and construct out of it as 
best she was able her control image. She aimed to make her 
actual movements as rapid as possible, to go cautiously in cer- 
tain regions, but to depend upon excess motor activity as the 
best method of procedure. By (XXIII) she had a schematic 
visual image of the path, accurate as far as the correct sequence 
of turns is concerned. The errors she made after this trial were 
due, she thinks, to careless attention. 

This subject's account offers points of similarity to the reports 
of both H. F. A. and M. R. F., but it seems to represent a third 
distinct type of method. Without the excess play of ideas of 



12 F. A. C. PERRIN 

M. R. F., she had that subject's attitude of active, concentrated 
attention and mental effort. In this respect she was a pronounced 
contrast to H. F. A., who from a comparison of the respective 
reports, seemed mentally more careless. Like him, however, 
she adopted a method characterized by its emphasis upon excess 
random activity, as the result of which the correct paths could 
be selected and retained. 

(4) Subject M. H. S. H. The general working method of 
this subject is rather difficult to characterize. A rather exten- 
sive rational procedure that she indulged in, in connection with 
learning to avoid a certain cul-de-sac, is described in an ensuing 
section of the account of this experiment. Her testimony is to 
the effect that she proceded as a rule cautiously, with her atten- 
tion alert for kinaesthetic cues. Her aim was to build up a 
control, in terms of a sequence of anticipatory motor images. 
This called for a rather active process of attending closely to 
kinaesthetic eixperiences, selecting out of them the ones concerned 
with sections of the true path, and organizing these into an ade- 
quate idea of the route. She indulged freely in verbal expressions, 
spoken aloud during the trial, but they were predominately by 
way of comment and exclamation, rather than description or sys- 
tematic thinking. 

(5) Subject J. W. H. The reports of J. W. H. as to method 
are very similar to those of E. C. P. They differ radically 
in one respect. This subject tended to rely upon motor habits as 
soon as they appeared, and let consciousness concern itself with 
other parts of the maze, or with extraneous matters, while 
E. C. P. put less emphasis upon the habit element than any other 
subject. She seemed to attend consistently to her visual scheme 
of the maze while traversing it. 

(6) Subject G. M. F. This subject differed from all the 
others in developing an auditory-verbal formula as a control of 
the maze. In the actual constructing of this set of verbal di- 
rections however, she used the type of kinaesthetic processes and 
imagery described by M. -H. S. H., and employed them in much 
the same way. That is, she did her thinking in these terms, rather 
than in verbal terms. She was still more conservative than the 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION I3 

subject just referred to in the matter of random exploration. 
Subject G. M. F. made very slow movements in the maze. She 
engaged quite consciously in what she called "wondering" or 
guessing, but made no great effort to reason out situations. She 
does not report attempts to try out different schemes, such as 
sticking to one side, altering speed, etc. In one or two instances, 
she undertook a systematic exploration of certain segments of 
the maze, but did not place much emphasis upon the value of such 
a procedure. She gave each trial an attitude of close attention; 
but her mental activity seemed for the most part to be concerned 
with discriminating kinaesthetic experiences, translating them 
into her verbal formula, and memorizing that formula. 

(7) Subject J. J. T. The introspections of this subject indi- 
cate more fluctuations and irregularities than those of any other 
learner. For the most part she put her active attention upon her 
task, but in several reports "relaxed attention" is the predomi- 
nant theme. Like the other subjects she was on the lookout for 
familiar cues, and in seeking them she put the emphasis upon 
the "long sweeps." She made no special effort at thinking out 
situations. She did at times attempt rather systematic explora- 
tion. But several times she indulged in what she called "willful 
and mahcious" exploration: that is, with no special motive in 
view except curiosity. All of her explorations she reported 
futile. She did some theorizing, or rather, guessing — e.g., she 
conceived at various times that there was more than one path 
in the maze. But like G. M. F., she did not develop her guesses 
into theories, and systematically attempt to substantiate them. 

{e) General comments on the different reports as to method: 
It is evident that the various subjects took different attitudes 
towards their problem. By attitude we mean simply the learning 
method the subject attempted to apply. Two opposed attitudes 
can be fairly well defined, in the light of the data given. One 
represents a more active, volitional attempt at thinking than does 
the other. The data also suggest another possible basis for a 
distinction of attitudes. Eliminating the matter of the amount 
of thinking, some of the subjects seemed to concentrate their at- 
tention upon the problem more than did others. On the basis of 



14 F. A. C. PERRIN 

the first distinction we contrasted H. F. A, and M. R. F. ; on 
the grounds of the second, E. C. P. and J. J. T. It is to be 
emphasized that these distinctions are decidedly relative ones, 
but the introspective records seem to justify a tentative classifi- 
cation on these bases. 

Assuming that there are differences in attitude, in the way 
the term is defined above, the question is strongly suggested, do 
these attitudes represent actual psychological differences in 
method? Each subject eft'ected a process of mental organiza- 
tion of experiences that functioned in his successful learning of 
the maze. Was the nature of this organization and application 
of experiences essentially the same for all the subjects? It is 
significant that all of them reported that they had to resort to a 
trial and error method sooner or later; but it is quite possible 
that they underestimated the importance of the rationalizing 
they indulged in. It is conceivable that the adult human mind 
functions in such a way that no other type of mental behavior 
is possible for this special learning process. But it is likewise 
possible that the ijiind is of such complexity that it may approach 
this type of problem in a variety of ways. The question was 
thought important enough to be made the object of a special 
investigation, which is described in Experiment III. 

3. The functioning of some of the specific activities 
involved in the learning process 

(a) Imagery, and sensory processes: No special reference was 
made, in the account of method, to the various types of imagery 
employed by the various subjects. This was made, however, 
a special topic of study, the motive being to determine if possible 
the relative efficacy of the different types employed, provided 
there were indications that any one type or combination showed 
itself to be of superior value in the learning activity. It is 
possible that in the instances where any one subject employed 
a complex of different kinds of imagery, some of them were 
of functional importance, and some of them merely accessory. 
The question of how the imagery was used, was deemed to be 
of primary importance. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION IS 

In our attempt to determine the imagery employed, we availed 
ourselves of the evidence presented by three lines of data: (a) 
detailed introspection on this subject was called for throughout 
the experiment; (b) an attempt was made to check this up by 
some objective tests, after the experiment was concluded; (c) 
one of the subjects was at the time of the investigation engaged 
in research on the problem of imagery diagnosis, in which she 
employed many of the introspectors who learned the mazes. Our 
records were checked up with the analysis she had made at 
the time.^ 

We had represented among our subjects a rather inclusive 
variety of image processes, complicated in all instances with 
sensory activities. The experience of tracing the path through 
a pencil maze necessarily elicits kinaesthetic and tactual factors. 
It was not to our purpose in every instance to distinguish sharply 
between the two factors, but we attempted to do so when there 
appeared any functional reason for the analysis. 

(i) Characterization of the subjects with reference to 
imaginal and sensory elements employed: (i) J. W. H. Quite 
sensitive to tactual processes in the maze. Utilized a strong 
sense of egocentric projection — the tactual feeling projected to 
the end of the pencil. Less conscious of kinaesthetic factors. 
On the basis of these experiences he developed visual imagery 
for certain segments of the maze, and employed the tactual- 
visual complex as his conscious control. 

(ii) M. H. S. H. A very pronounced and almost exclusive 
consciousness of kinaesthetic processes. While actually engaged 
in going through the maze her active attention was upon, (a), the 
motor sensations from the hand and arm, and to a less extent, 
from the body; (b), the unambiguous anticipatory imagery of 
the turn-to-come. We were not interested to determine whether 
this was purely imaginal or in part sensory in its make-up. It 
was a definite kinaesthetic anticipation of the segments of the 
path immediately in front of her, including one or at most two 
turns, of a more inclusive segment of the maze. Her idea of the 

^ M. R. Fernald: The Diagnosis of Mental Imagery, Ps3chol. Rev., 
Monog., Suppl., 1912, vol. XIV, No. i. 



i6 F. A. C. PERRIN 

maze was built up in terms of this kinaesthetic experience. Her 
learning, in its subjective aspect, involved the process of discrim- 
inating the sensory experiences concerned with the true path, 
retaining them, and applying them in the form of anticipatory 
images in succeeding trials. 

(iii) G. M. F. was like M. H. S. H. in having strong motor 
imagery, and in being primarily conscious of kinaesthetic sensory 
experiences while running the maze. She was peculiar among 
all the subjects in that she built up, as she learned, a specific 
auditory-verbal formula, which, as checked up by the motor 
imagery, served for a guide. She testified that she could not 
dispense with this formula, even during the last trials. 

(iv) M. R. F. employed a mixture of "vague, fleeting visual, 
scattered verbal, and indefinite motor imagery." At times one 
element would temporarily predominate. As a rule she was un- 
able to determine the relative importance or extent of the differ- 
ent components in the complex. 

(v) E. C. P. was a very definite and practically exclusive 
visualizer. She built up a clear-cut visual image of the maze, 
which she describes as schematic, in the sense that it was com- 
posed of "lines," rather than being an image of an actual wood 
maze, of any certain color, etc. Like G. M. F., she used her 
image as a guide for every trial, and ventured the opinion towards 
the close of the trials that she could never run through the maze 
without it. 

(vi) J. J. T. found it difficult to introspect on her imagery. 
She was conscious of kinaesthetic complexes, but had no definite 
motor imagery, and little or no visual. She does not think she 
employs much imagery — what she knows about the mazes she 
simply "knows." 

(vii) H. F. A. employed a kinaesthetic complex which he did 
not try to analyze into its imaginal and sensory components — 
i.e., his anticipations of turns were closely involved with the 
turns themselves. With this he used some verbal material. No 
visual or tactual. 

(2) Some data on how the imagery functioned: The type or 
combination each individual employed was used throughout the 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 17 

experiment, and was the same that the subjects reported in their 
statements made during the investigations of M. R. F., referred 
to above. There were no radical attempts to shift from one 
type of process to another. Each subject reported fluctuations 
in the amount used through the trials. In general, when the 
learner increased his effort to concentrate, or to study out situa- 
tions, he reports an accentuation of image activities. To' the 
extent that the learner relied upon the habit factor, the imagery 
was lost. 

The image activities were either retrospective or anticipatory. 
One aspect of the learning process was the retention of the seg- 
ments just traversed; the other was the application of this re- 
membered experience in a succeeding trial by way of an antici- 
pation of the turn or turns to come by means of which the subject 
was successful in making them correctly. 

There were some dift"erences reported as to the amount of path 
actually anticipated. E. C. P. would develop her image of the 
whole route, or as much of it as she knew, before leaving the 
starting box, after the signal to begin had been given. The two 
or three turns immediately in front of her would be more vividly 
expressed, however, as she went through the maze, while the 
"trail" behind would be practically ignored. M. H. S. H. would 
get her image of the turn-to-come when half way or two thirds 
of the way down the preceding path. The same type of image 
employed by G. M. F. would usually include several anticipated 
turns; but it was used in connection with her verbal fomiula, 
and included only certain segments of the maze. She elaborated 
her foiTnula as she had actual use for each step in it when going 
through the path. H. F. A. reported that his cues for the turns 
came as a rule after the "bump," when the end of the path was 
reached. The other subjects gave more varying testimony as 
to the extent of path that was anticipated. 

It is rather difficult to gauge the importance of the motor 
element. One would assume after reading the reports that the 
kinaesthetic processes played an important role with all the sub- 
jects, that the cue that was focal with M. H. S. H. functioned 
to some extent with all. This would of course imply a persistent 



i8 F. A. C. PERRIN 

relationship between the kinaesthetic processes and motor habit. 
The definite motor image cue which this subject got some dis- 
tance ahead of the actual turn was probably the same that J. J. T. 
and H. F. A. acted on in their controls; although in their cases 
it was not acted on as such, and it was closely identified with the 
actual act of turning. The tendency for the whole kinaesthesis 
to become habitual probably accounts for the phenomena of habit 
reported almost universally in the latter part of the learning. 
The introspections seemed to indicate that the kinaesthetic process 
behaved differently with different subjects, and we have some 
reason to believe that it actually functioned to a different relative 
degree with dift"erent subjects. It is interesting to note that 
E. C. P. consistently reported that she did not consciously utilize 
kinaesthetic processes as a guide at all. She was unique among 
the subjects in this respect. It is also significant that she also 
reported little or no automatism or habit, again differing from 
the other subjects. E. C. P., it is to be remembered, was our 
most consistent visualizer. 

In general, as far as our introspective data are valid, the 
different image processes, when represented in one individual, 
reinforced each other. It is interesting to note that while 
G. M. F. reported that her verbal formula was her immediate 
control, it is hardly sufficiently explicit to guide a subject, un- 
familiar with the maze, through its paths. It reads, "Along in 
this alley — around corner — here — straight up, going to turn 
to left — now I go down — back to right' — now here I must be 
careful and stick to upper side of alley," etc. This is for the 
region A-H. Evidently this set of directions alone could scarce- 
ly suffice for safe passage through the maze. The inference is 
that it was probably reinforced by motor cues, feelings of 
familiarity, etc. 

In one or two cases we found instances of an image conflict. 
G. M. F. reports such a case where the formula told her to go 
one way, while a motor image directed her into an opposite path. 
The verbal cue turned out to be correct. M. H. S. H. in two 
instances reported a conflict of motor images. This was after 
she had just learned to avoid a cul-de-sac, and one tendency rep- 
resented the habit effect. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 19 

(3) The question of the relative efficacy of the cHfferent types 
of imagery employed : It was impossible, after a comparison of 
the objective records and the introspections, to make any positive 
correlations between efficiency and the type of imagery used. 
In the first place, it is obvious that too many complications enter 
into the learning. Two of the best learners, E. C. P. and 
H. F. A., used very divergent image processes. Two of the 
subjects who employed similar image controls, H. F, A. and 
M. H. S. H., have extremely opposed objective records. 

After the maze was once learned, any one type of control was 
as efficient as any other, as far as the criterion established for 
this experiment was concerned. Evidently, the relative super- 
iority of any one type of thought process, if such existed, must 
have asserted itself during the earlier part of the learning. 

There is some evidence to indicate that those with predomi- 
nant motor imagery tended to establish stronger motor habits 
than the others. M. H. S. H., in the distraction tests, to which 
reference is made later, was exceedingly successful in going 
through the maze when her attention was mainly concerned with 
other things. E. P. C. failed in the same test. But this does 
not by any means imply that a strong tendency towards the 
establishing of non-conscious habits is beneficial in learning a 
maze. Habits worked for harm as well as for good. In the 
case of M. H. S. H., a cul-de-sac became incorporated into the 
true path and was habitually run for a number of trials before the 
mistake was discovered, each time being responsible for a num- 
ber of errors. 

It may be that visual imagery is intrinsically better adapted 
to express spatial relations than kinaesthetic or verbal. It is 
more comprehensive — a verbal image must unroll itself in time, 
as must also kinaesthetic one, while the visual image is presented 
more instantaneously. E. C. P. anticipated more of the path 
before reaching it than did any other subject; H. F. A. did less 
than any other. Both had good records. 

The conclusion was strongly suggested to the experimenter 
in the light of all the data at hand, that the learning depended 
upon the ability of the subject to organize the experience pre- 



20 F. A. C. PERRIN 

sented by the objective act of going through the various paths 
in the maze, rather than upon any type of imagery employed 
to retain these experiences. Several indications were found to 
the effect that different subjects used the same kind of imagery 
in different ways — e.g., M. H. S. H. and H. F. A. with motor 
imagery ; G. M. F. and M. R. F. used verbal material in different 
ways. 

{b) Habit and Attention: Very early in the series, in some 
instances in the first half-dozen trials, subjects began to report 
that certain segments of the maze were being run with the atten- 
tion directed upon regions ahead, or upon foreign matters. This 
type of thing was the more emphasized as the trials continued, 
until various subjects, after the last few trials, reported that most 
of the maze was traversed with focal attention wholly concerned 
with other things. 

This habit tendency developed in connection with two different 
kinds of situation in the maze: (i) certain segements, such as 
A-F, which had presented relatively few opportunities for error, 
never at any time became the object for much attention. Such 
regions early were reported as "almost automatic" — "attention 
concerned with the cul-de-sac ahead." Another type of thing 
occurred, of the same nature as far as the subjective aspect of 
it is concerned, of which the reports of M. H. S. H. afforded 
an excellent example. This subject incorporated the cul-de-sac 
path 6-8-9 into her true path without realizing what she had 
done. Ordinarily, the end of a blind passage afforded a suffi- 
ciently characteristic cue to inform any subject that he was in 
a cul-de-sac. In her case, however, the passage to the end and 
back was sensed merely as a turn in the true path, and as 
a result, this part of her path became habitual before she dis- 
covered her mistake. (2) In other instances, segments which 
were learned at considerable expense of attention and study 
eventually became habitual. The path F-K was the common 
instance of this. 

The behavior of attention has already been referred to in 
our report of the image processes. It either, (i), kept pace 
with the actual activity in going through the maze, (2), 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 21 

"lagged behind," or was retrospective, engaged in the attempt 
to retain the knowledge just acquired, or (3), was anticipa- 
tory. In a relative way, these three types of the play of atten- 
tion made their appearance in the order named. Ordinarily, the 
progress of any trial, or the traversing of any one path, would 
elicit a back and forth play of attention between the region 
ahead and the "trail" behind, checked up by constant reference 
to the path the subject was actually engaged in making. This 
behavior is characteristic of all the subjects. 

A rather surprising divergence of behavior in the matter of 
habit was in evidence. E. C. P. constantly testified that her 
visual scheme was her control, and that she employed it in her 
last trials as consciously as she did in the first. She was quite 
sure that she would never be able to dispense with it. M. R. F. 
also emphasized to a very small extent the phenomenon of 
unconscious running of segments of the maze. But this sub- 
ject was engaged in an active series of studies throughout the 
learning, while E. C. P. was one of the first to build up an ade- 
quate idea of the true path. G. M. F. reported her verbal 
formula essential to the last. 

In general, the appearance and predominance of the phenome- 
non of unconscious running seemed to be correlated with the 
relative reliance upon kinaesthetic factors, but J. W. H., who- 
next to E. C. P. employed visual imagery, emphasized the habit- 
ual, unconscious elements more than any other subject. J. W. H., 
also, it is to be remembered, reported on the introspective side 
a minimum of kinaesthetic processes. He thought they were 
decidedly subordinate to tactual ones. But M. H. S. H. who 
relied so exclusively upon motor imagery, while she emphasized 
in her reports habitual running, maintained at the same time 
that it was a conscious performance. The appearance of habit 
is hardly to be ascribed to the number of times the maze was 
run. Those who did report it, testified to its appearance early 
in the series. Neither is it obviously correlated with speed, as 
a comparison of the different behaviors show E. C. P. and 
J. W. H. similar in this respect. It is not to be explained in 
terms of the amount of attention put into the learning as a whole. 



22 F. A. C. PERRIN 

J. J. .T. and J. W. H., who occupy rather extreme positions in 
this respect, both report strong^ the role of habit, in the sense of 
unconscious running. 

The data, by way of summaiy, indicate that various subjects 
varied in their rehance upon the habit factor. In the instances 
of its extreme predominance, the subject could safely depend 
upon it to carry him through difficult regions of the maze while 
he was attending almost exclusively to extraneous affairs. In 
other cases, although habit facilitated the task of going through 
the maze, some attention to the difficulties in the route was neces- 
sary. Finally, two of the subjects reported that an amount of 
conscious attention was demanded in each trial, which did not 
seemingly diminish as the result of repetition. 

(c) Discriinination and Association, Memory and Recogni- 
tion: The processes involved in selecting segments of the maze 
which belonged to the true path out of the confusion of expe- 
riences which in the first trials presented themselves, and arrang- 
ing them in the proper sequence, obviously constituted the main 
organization that the subject was called on to accomplish. 

It has already been stated that certain passages early acquired 
familiar "tangs," due to their direction, extent, position, etc. 
Practically every passage had something analogous to a local 
sign, due to the quality, strength, and combination of kinaesthetic 
and cutaneous experiences occasioned by the act of traversing it 
and attending to it. But the subject had not only to attend, but 
to remember. At some given time in the early stage of the 
process, he would find himself stopped by a blind ending, say the 
termination of path 9. Assuming that at that moment he had 
rather definitely in mind, in some image form, the memory of 
9-8-6-H-G-F just traversed, he would not necessarily have any 
cue as to which of the turns between these passages had led him 
off the true path and into the cul-de-sac. This was the type of 
difficulty reported universally. Add to this situation the fact 
that in the earlier trials the subject had in mind only a confused 
memory blur of the immediate past experiences, and the nature of 
the conscious side of the learning is easy to conceive. 

The learner had two things to do in such an exigency. He 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 23 

must in the first place escape from the situation. In many in- 
stances, especially in the earlier part of the learning, he deliber- 
ately resorted to a random trial and error method, letting any 
attempt to get a mental hold on the situation go where it would. 
But if he were to build up an adequate knowledge of the path, he 
must in addition learn how in the future to avoid such a 
situation. 

It was then the concern of the subject to retrace, attend closely 
to his cues, and recognize the regained path as soon as possible. 
The chances are that in doing so he would go into 7 and back. 
Retracing from there (possibly reentering 9) he would finally 
find 6, turn either into H or continue I, and make a number of 
ensuing turns before he found his bearings. Possibly in the 
next trial, in an attempt to escape from this region, he would 
turn down 4. At the end of 5 he would find himself, of course, 
worse off than he was in the previous trial. 

There were two methods in evidence by which the subject 
learned to avoid this cul-de-sac 6-9. One was the actual process 
of learning the whole situation by repeated exploration. The 
other was the result of turning directly from H to I by accident, 
without at the time recognizing it as the correct thing to do, 
remembering this variation in the route, and afterwards ignoring 
passage 6. In this case the cul-de-sac was not learned at all. 6 
was simply the opening from clear sailing into an unknown 
region of danger. This process of falling into difficulties and 
learning how to avoid the place on the true path that was the 
location of the difficulty, called for the discriminating, associat- 
ing, memorizing processes. But it was obvious that two subjects 
could learn to avoid the same region by two methods, one of 
which called for a more active play of these processes than the 
other. Unfortunately, the subject, although he was aware of 
the two methods of escaping difficulties, could not choose be- 
tween them. The second type of thing was invariably accidental, 
or due to causes which his introspection did not comprehend. 

Thus while specific acts of memory and discrimination en- 
tered into the learning process, they did not constitute it. The 
background of preconceptions, the effect of habit, the play of 



24 F. A. C. PERRIN 

ideational activity, all entered into the mental organizing in- 
volved in these relatively simple forms of learning. The experi- 
menter devised a series of extended tests designed to guage the 
ability of the different subjects in the matter of sensory discrim- 
ination and memory, under conditions as similar to those involved 
in Experiment I as possible. The results of these tests offered 
no basis for an explanation of the efficiency in the maze. As 
was noted above, E. C. P. was able to describe the path before it 
was technically learned. J. J. T., when the experiment was com- 
pleted, was not able to describe accurately the sequence of turns. 
The relative lengths of paths were grossly distorted, even in 
regions where the path had been carefully worked out, by all 
the subjects. 

{d) Illusions: It is convenient to make reference under a 
separate heading to the fact that the number and nature of the 
misconceptions the subject formed of the maze were startling. 
Lengths of paths were over- or underestimated frequently by 
one half. Certain areas of the maze were violently distorted as 
to position and relative size. The fact has already been referred 
to that one subject believed in the existence of four different 
paths in the maze. This may not properly be called an illusion, 
but we found it impossible to establish boundary lines between 
errors in sensory discrimination, illusions, and misconceptions 
due to guesses or theories. 

That these illusions often played a definite role, generally to 
the detriment of the subject's control over the learning, is evident 
from the reports. Sometimes an immediate increase in time and 
errors resulted, but often the objective records show nothing 
of the misconception. H. F. A. (VII) ran up 15 errors due to 
the fact that he first noticed in this trial that M was a relatively 
long path : he had always considered it a short path, or rather, 
had not had his attention called to it at all. At this trial he 
entered it, was surprised at its length, concluded he was astray, 
and retraced, in an attempt to find the path he formerly took 
in getting from L to the left side of the maze. M. R. F.'s concep- 
tion of the four paths resulted in needless exploration, and her 
error and time curves were correspondingly enlarged. J. J. T. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 25 

(X) found the relative proportions of the passages in the right 
side of the maze distorted, but since her idea of the sequence 
was unahered, the discovery made no appreciable difference in 
her records. G. M. F. (VI) decided that there were two routes 
from the entrance to the exit. In this case, the judgment was the 
result of a careful exploration of the region. After the judgment 
was formed, however, it did not influence her error records, for 
she simply followed up whichever path she ''happened to be on" 
in this region, and since there was only one, her record is clear. 

As for the cause of these illusions, the introspections seem to 
indicate the following : ( i ) errors in pure sensory discrimination ; 
and, (2), the fact that the attention frequently became focal at 
times in passages usually run without definite notice. Hence 
the subject perceived things he had been blind to before, and 
assumed that he was in a new situation. 

(e) Affection and Emotion: The process of learning the maze 
elicited at times affective reactions that in some cases obviously 
influenced the progress of the subject. There were sufficiently 
in evidence, as one would assume, the feeling of discouragement 
in times of difficulty, and the corresponding state of elation when 
the difficulty was overcome. 

The extremely disagreeable, hopeless feeling of being baffled 
very often resulted in a definite change of activity or method. 
Repeatedly, the subjects would find themselves in cul-de-sacs, 
would try at some length to extricate themselves by a study and 
exploration of the region, and would then resort in disgust to a 
random trial and error procedure in an effort to escape at any 
cost. It was extremely difficult to gauge the practical effect of 
this method. Quite often it resulted in discoveries of permanent 
value. 

In one or two cases excitement over personal affairs distracted 
the subject's attention and the learning process suffered accord- 
ingly. Thus E. C. P. had just passed the German examination 
required of candidates for the doctor's degree a half hour before 
trial VII, and was in a state of considerable elation. Her record 
that day includes 75 errors, the most made by any subject in any 
trial. 



26 F. A. C. PERRIN 

This affective aspect showed itself most usefully in the incen- 
tive for quick learning. The sense of rivalry among the subjects 
was acute, and the learning was almost literally regarded as a 
test of intelligence. The experimenter kept each of the subjects 
sufficiently informed of the progress of the other learners to main- 
tain this motive at a working level. 

(/) Thinking and Reasoning: The reports of all the subjects 
have implied in them something more than the specific activities 
referred to in the preceding sections. Various indications have 
already been given to the effect that the kind of mental organiza- 
tion elicited was of an exceedingly complex sort. In some cases 
this amounted to overt attempts at logical reasoning; in all in- 
stances it seemed to have involved in it the rudiments of the 
higher thought processes. 

While the problem was one in which a minimum of direct 
experiential background could be drawn upon by the subject, he 
nevertheless did avail himself of the general intelligence of 
human experience, in a way that an animal could not possibly do. 

His general attitude, in the first place, was that of a learner 
who knows he has a problem to solve^ — certainly a rather impor- 
tant factor when one considers that the active effort of the learner 
was the thing that primarily characterized his activities. 

Numerous specific reports indicated that the subject was able 
to call to his aid knowledge of a more general sort, and that he 
was able to conceive of working schemes not elaborated as the 
result of actual experience in the maze. Thus E. C. P. (IV) 
said the path was of the shape of the capital M. M. R. F. on the 
start conceived the idea of exploring one side of the path first. 

An example of the realization and solution of a difficulty in 
a way that disclosed the attempt to rationalize the problem, and 
the amount of trial and error actually employed in its solution, is 
found in the experience of M. H. S. H., which is different from 
a number of instances given only inasmuch as it was more 
extended, and was elaborated more consciously. 

During the first twenty trials, almost without exception, this 
subject went daily into cul-de-sac 6-7-8-9. During this time 
she constantly reported a tendency for familiar parts of the route 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 27 

to drop into the habit class. Until about (XXV) she would go 
into this cul-de-sac eveiy day, and retrace out of it, under the 
impression that she had made no errors. By (XXV), however, 
some cue given at the end of 9 made her aware of what she had 
been doing. She immediately began to study the situation. 
Since she had incorporated this into her true path — so she rea- 
soned — how was she going to avoid it, since she did not know 
how much of the territory was cul-de-sac region? And since 
the cul-de-sac runs "up" (she meant of course either 6 or 9) 
and the true path also runs in the same direction, how was she 
going to be able to tell which was which ? Her conception of the 
situation, as she explained, was that she gets into the cul-de-sac 
by turning up from some point on the true path. From (XXVI) 
to (XXXI) the conditions of affairs did not change. She had 
no feeling of being in error until she reached the end of 9, and 
practically restated her reasoning process : "I have to turn up- 
to get out of the thing, this cul-de-sac also turns up, so there is 
no way to tell which is cul-de-sac and which is true path." 

Curiously enough, in (XXIX) she ran the maze without 
error, but reported the whole affair as almost unconscious, and 
she was therefore unable to explain how she escaped from the 
cul-de-sac. 

At (XXXII) the scheme occurred to her to avoid the region 
by turning up sooner in the path : "Will try this next time." In 

(XXXIII) she tried it but found no path, (i.e., in H) leading 
in that direction. However, she said at the end of this trial that 
the plan seemed logically sound, so she would try it again. In 

(XXXIV) she attempted it once more, with the same result, 
and reported, "Tomorrow I will turn dozmi sooner than usual." 
(That is, some path that would lead from H to L, turning 
down from H.) This also failed. In (XXXVI) she got half 
way down 6, when the idea occurred to her that she had gone 
past the customary path downwards, that she was now in a new 
region, and that she had, therefore, better retrace. 

In her next trial, the true situation occurred to her: not to 
turn down at all, in the path G-J. This solution of the problem 
came as the result of the fact that she had unintentionally and 



28 F. A. C. PERRIN 

accidently turned up in the trial previously made, and avoided 
the cul-de-sac. 

This report suggested to the experimenter the advisability of 
making the amount of reasoning possible in such a situation the 
object of a more extended study, and with that purpose in view, 
the third experiment was designed. 

4. A COMPARISON OF THE SUBJECTIVE ASPECTS OF THE LEARNING 
PROCESS WITH THE OBJECTIVE RECORDS 

The criterion of five consecutive trials without error as an 
indication that the maze was learned was an entirely arbitrary 
one, even if the subjective aspects were not considered at all. 
Had the test been four trials, G. M. F. would have had the 
maze learned at trial XVII instead of at XXIII. If the standard 
had been determined at six trials, E. C. P. would have needed 
at least six extra trials. Several subjects ran occasional perfect 
trials in the earlier stages of the learning, before they were able 
to approximate a detailed description of the maze — E. C. P., XI; 
G. M. F., XIV; J. J. T., XIV; H. F. A., VI; J. W. H., XII; 
M. R. F., XIV. 

Had a psychological criterion been attempted to determine 
when the maze was learned, e.g., the standard of ability to 
describe the true path, the test would have been just as arbitrary. 
With any subjective standard, the time and error records would 

be different from those based 
upon the objective test adopt- 
ed — the number of trials 
would have been increased for 
some, decreased for others. 
E. C. P. described the true 
path accurately at the close of 
trial XXIII. H. F. A., when 
Figure 3. Drawing of Normal Maze, ^j^^ j^^^e was technically learn- 
when learned, J. J. T. -i 1 t- i- 

ed, described b as extendmg 

up from E instead of down, turning to the right, and then 
turning down to meet H. J. J. T. drew the reproduced 
diagram [Fig. 3] to represent all she knew of the true path. 




EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 29 

after she had run it five times in succession without error. 
M. R. F. could describe the proper sequence of turns, but 
she still had the idea of other paths leading from the entrance 
to the exit. The fact is also to be noted that early in the series 
most of the subjects were able to describe most of the path— 
in the stage represented by trails VII-XV. 

The essence of the explanation of the irregularity consists in 
the fact that to each subject the maze was a series of definite and 
relatively isolated problems, rather than one problem. The 
number of these special points of difficulty had as a rule dwindled 
down to one or two after the first VII-XII trails. From that 
stage on the attention was mainly concerned with these specific re- 
gions of trouble, while the rest of the path became almost 

automatic. 

It is evident that the curve does not at any stage represent the 
development of the subject's knowledge of the maze path. A 
sudden increase in errors and time may indicate merely that 
the subject had seen fit to do some exploring, at the sacrifice 
of voluntarily playing havoc with his record: M. R. F., XXI; 
J. J. T., VIII ; G. M. F., VI. Sometimes these explorations were 
productive of good results, sometimes not. Again, a sudden 
jump upwards of the time and error curves was the result of 
careless accident— the subject through lack of attention would 
slip into a cul-de-sac, even when he knew exactly the location of 
its entrance. Once in, he would get temporarily confused, and 
would escape often only after a trial and error expedient. An 
example of this is J. W. H. In this and in other cases, the 
attention had been uniformly concerned with the trial, but had 
suffered a temporary relapse. In other instances, a bad record 
was the result of general laxity of attention throughout an entire 
trial, or its direction to some extraneous affair. 

The difficulty of the correlation of efficiency as measured by 
the total time involved in learning the maze, and the total num- 
ber of errors made, is obvious from a glance at the following 
table. In the first place, this objective standard of efficiency 
is ambiguous. Time and error records represent only two of 
various possible criteria. The total amount of distance tra- 



30 F. A. C. PERRIN 

versed in the maze is a possible standard. Again, there are dif- 
ferent methods of computing errors. 

The total of the time and errors expended by each subject, in 
the order of their increasing excellence, is as follows : 

Time Errors 

M. H. S. H 53'-58" M. H. S. H 644 

J. J. T 4o'-i4" J. J. T 412 

G. M. F 32'-32" E. C. P 285 

H. F. A 27'-58" M. R. F 279 

M. R F 27'-58" J. W. H 243 

J. W. H 22'-47" H. F. A 213 

E. C. P 2i'-22" G. M. F 179 

The relative predominance of a single specific activity involved 
in the learning process can hardly be called upon to explain the 
above lists of the subjects in their increasing order of merit, as 
the summarized data on these activities show : 

Imagery: (a) E. C. P. employed visual imagery to the greatest 
extent, J. W. H. ranks next to her in this respect, and M. R. F. 
was a rather distant third. This would seem to suggest correla- 
tion between imagery and efficiency. But the two last used 
visual material in connection with other forms, and H. F. A., 
whose time record is very close to that of M. R. F., reports no 
visual imagery at all. The error column fails entirely to suggest 
a corresponding relationship between the use of visual material 
and success with the maze, (b) M. H. S. H. and H. F. A. 
represent the most exclusive emphasis upon motor processes; 
G. M. F. employed the same type of imagery, but complicated 
with verbal material. No obvious correlation in this respect is 
suggested, (c) It does not appear that a combination of image 
processes, such as was represented by M. R. F., G. M. F., and 
J. W. H., is to be directly related with skill in the maze. 

Thinking and Attention: (a) M. R. F., who attempted to 
the greatest extent a rationalizing attitude, occupies middle 
ground in the matter of efficiency. It would be exceedingly 
difficult to determine how the remaining subjects are to be 
ranked as to the amount of thinking they did. M. H. S. H. has 
a considerable amount to her credit, but it was concerned with 
one particular segment of the maze, (b) On the basis of the 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 31 

amount of attention paid to the maze, irrespective of the attempt 
at intellectualizing, E. C. P., J. W. H., G. M. F., and M. R. F. 
might be listed as representing the maximum amount, with 
M. H. S. H. and H. F. A. in an intermediate position ,and J. J. T. 
rather definitely employing the least. Again, assuming that this 
classification is adequate, it corresponds to the order of merit 
column only in a general way. 

Habit : J. W. H. and M. H. S. H. emphasized the maximum 
amount as regards this factor, and with them H. F. A. should 
probably be placed. M. R. F. and J. J. T. report it to a consider- 
able less extent; E. C. P., little or none. A correlation in this 
respect is again difficult inasmuch as this factor seemed to be 
detrimental as well as beneficial. 

B. SOME EXPERIMENTS WITH MODIFIED 
CONDITIONS 

At the conclusion of the experiment just described, it was 
thought advisable to supplement the study with a series of 
additional tests, designed, (i) to serve as a control over the 
data given by the experiment; (2) to bring out if possible any 
new data, or to enable us to emphasize aspects of the old. The 
instructions given for Experiment I were followed, subject to 
changes imposed by the modified conditions. The tests followed 
Experiment I in the order described. 

I. Description of the tests, and results 

Test I. The subject was asked to go through a maze, the exact 
duplicate of the one just learned, but reduced in size to one- 
fourth the proportions. 

Each subject made two trials in this smaller maze. Only one 
of them, E. C. P., made errors in the first trial. She made 
two, quite obviously due to the fact that her pencil became caught 
in one of the passages. A few errors were made by two sub- 
jects in the second trial, all of which were accidental in their 
nature, due to the more difficult technique as compared with that 
involved in going through the larger maze. 

The introspections were unanimous to the effect that the con- 



32 F. A. C. PERRIN 

trols were the same. The subject, after he had traversed the 
first passage, formed an estimate of the relative lengths of the 
other passages, and went through the route correctly, with the 
errors noted. The various reports read : "Rather uncomfortable, 
but decided feeling of familiarity of the situation — used same 
control I used for the regular maze — outside of the novelty of 
the performance, the same factors were involved." All of them 
who reported the habit factor in the large maze, testified that it 
beha;ved in practically the same manner in this case. 

The image controls were simply modified to meet the situation. 
E. C. P. says: "Used same visual image, reduced in size." 
J. W. H. gives practically the same report. G. M. F. used her 
usual verbal formula. The subjects employing motor controls 
report nothing new. They were simply adapted to a smaller 
objective situation. The habit element was distinctly functional. 
The increased mechanical difficulty of the operation however 
made the customary reliance upon it impossible. 

Practically every subject, at the close of this test, was positive 
that he would be able to walk through a maze of the same 
pattern, blindfolded, with few or no errors. We append this as 
an indication of the introspective reaction of the subject on the 
modified condition. 

Test 2. The subject was required to go through the normal 
maze with the pencil attached to the wrist instead of being held 
by the hand. For this test the pencil was firmly attached to a 
splint, which was bound firmly but comfortably to the wrist and 
fore-arm by surgeon's bandage. He was then asked to go through 
the reduced maze, used in test i , with the pencil held in the hand, 
using finger and wrist movement only, the arm being held sta- 
tionary on a support provided. This second part of the test re- 
quired one shift of the arm, after the middle of the maze had 
been reached. 

The idea in this test was to eliminate, in the first part of it, the 
kinaesthetic and tactual factors from the arm and fingers; in 
the second part, to cut out the same elements from the arm, as 
far as possible. Since test i had shown the same controls to be 
operative in the smaller maze as in the larger, we felt justified 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 33 

in employing it for the second part of test 2, inasmuch as the 
task of going through the larger maze under the same condi- 
tions would have necessitated some half-dozen or more arm 
shifts. 

About half the subjects made from 1-4 errors in the test with 
the wrist attachment. In order of importance, the causes as- 
signed by- the subjects were: (a) distraction of the attention 
by the technique of the test, (b) actual physical difficulty, (c) 
orientation : this was more difficult under these conditions, as the 
tactual cues which ordinarily told the subject his location were 
"blunted." They employed the projected tactual sensibility as 
best they could. J. W. H. reported that the tactual feeling- 
was transferred, not eliminated. 

Fewer errors were made when the smaller maze was run by 
hand movement only. The main difficulty reported was the sheer 
physical one. 

It is noteworthy that while the subjects in Experiment I con- 
sistently emphasized the arm sensation factor more than the hand, 
more trouble was experienced in the test in which hand and fingeri 
sensations were approximately dispensed with, than in the hand 
movement test. In either case, however, the main emphasis was 
upon the mechanical difficulty of the process. The subjects were 
sure they did not, in the first part of the test, elicit hand and 
finger sensations from th^ hand, by incipient movements, and 
then transfer them. They simply utilized the sensations from the 
wrist instead. In a similar way, they did not evoke arm sensa- 
tions or images in the second part of the experiment and substi- 
tute them for the same sensation normally called out by the 
actual use of the arm, but they transferred their attention to the 
fingers and hand, and utilized the sensations coming from them. 

Test 3. In this test the larger maze was used, and the condi- 
tions were the same, except that the subjects were asked to use 
the left hand instead of the right, which was used by all learners 
in Experiment I. 

All the subjects reported the process difficult because awkward, 
but all of them reported the some controls used. J. W. H., who 
is extremely right handed, reported an actual transference of 



34 F. A. C. PERRIN 

kinaesthetic imagery from the right hand and arm to the left. 
M. R. F. reports it "A transference, not a new learning process. 
It seemed queer, like the small maze." E. C. P. ran up i6 
errors with the left hand in the first trial. She ascribed it how- 
ever to sheer awkwardness, "the difficulty of doing anything 
with the left hand." She made no errors in the second trial. 
M. H. S. H., who depended so exclusively upon kinaesthetic cues 
and imagery, reported the process the same; it was essentially 
a transference. In all cases, the transference was made without 
special effort. 

Test 4. Preliminary to this, and to all succeeding tests, the 
subject first went through the maze, normal running, in ordei* 
to keep conditions as nearly as possible the same as they were at 
the completion of Experiment i. 

In test 4 the subject was seated in front of the standard maze, 
the usual conditions being observed. Instead of allowing him to 
begin at the starting box, however, the experimenter placed the 
pencil, upon which the subject retained his hold, in various places 
in the maze, both (a) in the true path, and (b) in cul-de-sacs. 
The subject was asked to proceed from these places to the exit, 
under the condition of a normal trial in the maze. At least 50 
different tests were made for each subject, ten or a dozen being 
made at each sitting. The order was made as irregular as possi- 
ble, to obviate any attempt of the subject to guess where his next 
place of starting would be. 

The results from the subjects in this test were strikingly uni- 
form. In every case, without any suggestions on the part of the 
experimenter, and without communication between the subjects, 
they made a definite judgment, after being placed in the maze, 
and before they started for the exit, as to their location. After 
this tendency was observed by the experimlenter, they were 
asked to make their judgments aloud. The judgments were in 
every case based upon the cues furnished by the muscular and 
strain sensations from the arm. 

In every case the success of the subject in going from the place 
of starting to the exit with a minimum of errors seemed almost 
directly proportionate to the accuracy of the judgment. In many 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 35 

cases he made more errors when placed in the true path than 
when set down in cul-de-sacs — this, too, in view of the fact 
that no subject at this time could describe all of the cul-de-sacs, 
while all of them had a rather definite knowledge of the true 
path. In one trial that resulted in 15 errors, M. R. F. was set 
down just before the end of B, but made the judgment that 
she was at the beginning of G. She started left, was stopped 
after a short distance, turned up, and was stopped again. So far 
her experience fully substantiated her judgment. But when she 
attempted to turn left again (thinking she was on H), she found 
herself blocked. She reported a sudden and intense sense of 
absolute confusion, a realization that she was hopelessly lost: 
"If I'm not here, I haven't the slightest idea where I am." 

This is a very characteristic description of the reaction that 
Test 4 elicited. If the judgment were inaccurate, the process 
was one of a trial and error moving around, trying to fit one idea 
after another to the cues furnished by the experience. Recog- 
nition or orientation might come after one or two turns, or might 
not come until after prolonged exploration. 

As the tests were continued, all the subjects increased in their 
ability to form more accurate judgments. It was practically 
impossible for the experimenter to compare the relative ability 
of the different subjects, either at the beginning or at the close 
of this test, on account of the fluctuations, which were rather 
extreme. 

Test 5. In this test the normal maze was used with the follow- 
ing modifications : 

(i) The subject, after being blindfolded, was walked around 
the room in various directions before being seated. 

(2) The chair, table, and maze, were rotated at various angles, 
45°, 90°, 180°, etc., from their original position, in an irregular 
order, while their relative positions remained unaltered. The 
subject was then seated directly, and asked to go through the 
maze as usual. 

(3) The chair was placed in different positions facing the maze, 
which, with the table, remained unaltered. 

(4) The chair and table remained in their normal position, 



36 F. A. C. PERRIN 

but the maze itself was rotated, clock-wise and counter-clockwise, 
at all practicable angles. 

(5) By means of a special apparatus, the maze was made to 
rotate, in either direction, zifJule the subject was attempting to 
trace through it with the pencil. In all the other conditions fol- 
lowed in this test, no part of the apparatus was changed after 
the subject actually began the trial. In part (4), the maze 
rested upon a wood base instead of upon the plate glass, on the 
bottom of which three wheels were attached. These rested upon 
a circular track of wire laid upon another wood base, so that 
maze and upper base could be rotated in either direction, at any 
speed, by the hand of the experimenter. The apparatus worked 
smoothly, and was practically noiseless. 

In general, very little disturbance resulted from the modifica- 
tions imposed in the first four series of test 5. For (i) and (2) 
the subjects were unanimous in reporting that they were not in 
the least disturbed, that positive orientation did not bother them. 
All of them had previously been aware in what direction the chair 
faced. No amount of turning them around, in (i), enabled 
the experimenter to disturb their sense of position. No errors or 
increase of time resulted from (i) and (2). 

The introspections from (3) and (4) were similar. The image 
controls were simply adapted to the new situation. The process, 
on the part of J. W. H., seemed to accentuate his imagery. 
E. C. P. said that her visual image was "turned around" to meet 
the new situation. With subjects who had emphasized kinaes- 
thetic and tactual factors, the new conditions called out nothing 
new in these processes, notwithstanding the fact that for any 
turn or path of the maze, an actual different set of muscles might 
be involved from those used normally. There was w^ith all a 
consciousness of a new arm position, and a consequent feeling 
of awkwardness, but the process, in this as in Experiment I, 
was one of controlling a certain sequence of turns. The kinaes- 
thesis was built up in terms of this sequence. For tests (3) and 
(4) we recorded a few errors that were ascribed to general dis- 
traction of attention. 

The rotating maze was, in the following order, (a) turned 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION yj 

slowly, at a uniform rate, in one direction, without any instruc- 
tions being previously given to the subject; (b) rotated faster, 
at the rate of about one revolution per lo seconds (the average 
time it took the subject to go from entrance to exit under normal 
conditions) in either direction, but constant for each trial, until* 
the exit was reached; (c) rotated, during any one trial, in either 
direction, with frecjuent and variable changes of speed and 
direction. 

The observation of the behavior of the subject when he first 
tried the rotating maze proved to be extremely interesting. The 
maze was moved very slowly. The subject covered about one- 
fourth of the path before he realized that something was wrong. 
Most of them became vaguely aware that something was unusual, 
and thought that the angles were being altered. Very few errors 
were made, however, during this trial. 

In the series in which the maze was rotated slowly in one di- 
rection and at a uniform speed, the introspections were very 
similar to those given in (3) and (4) of this test. The subject 
first got the cue of the direction and speed of rotation from the 
sensations of the arm as he traversed the path A-B. He then 
tried to gauge his movements in terms of the new conditions. 
The visualizers testified that their visual image ''rotated," keep- 
ing pace, and checked up by, the maze itself. They modified this 
statement to the effect that they visualized the pattern in a num- 
ber of successive positions, which followed in general the rota- 
tion of the maze. Those employing other controls reported 
nothing not given in (2) and (3). All of them proceeded 
slowly and cautiously and very few errors were made. 

In the last part of this test, in which the maze was rotated with 
all possible variations in change of speed and direction, the task 
of tracing through it proved to be either extremely difficult or 
flatly impossible. The subject could not get adequate cues as 
to the changes that were being made, or if he could, he was not 
able to control his movements quickly enough to get a new orien- 
tation before a new change was made. He was able to keep in 
mind rather clearly what path he had reached, but he was not 
able to proceed from there. If, e.g., he had reached the middle 



38 F. A. C. PERRIN 

of L, a few rapid turns would suffice to confuse his sense of 
direction, and he would not continue from sheer inability to 
tell whether he was headed for K or M. 

Test 6. In this test the subjects were started at the exit, and 
instructed to proceed to the entrance. Otherwise, the conditions 
were the same as for Experiment I. 

The task was not found difficult. Two subjects made errors 
the first trial, but corrected them easily. There was the ten- 
dency in evidence that characterized all the tests to accentuate 
the imagery employed. The introspections were in most cases 
practically a description of the objective behavior : they simply 
followed the path backwards. The motor subjects relied a little 
more on prompting by verbal cues, but the same kind of antici- 
patory motor imagery was reported. The habit factor was at a 
minimum for all the subjects, but after the test had been repeated 
several times it began to make its appearance at a relatively earlier 
stage than it did in the first experiment. In general, the trip 
was made by each subject reversing the various steps in his 
idea of the sequence of turns, in terms of the imagery he em- 
ployed for every test. The usual kinaesthetic and tactual sensa- 
tional cues were attended to for the purpose of checking up the 
control idea. 

Test 7. The maze was turned upper surface down, and 
clamped to the plate glass as usual. Since the grooves were cut 
through the board, this reversal resulted in the "mirror" maze. 
The subject was told of the alteration before he made the trials. 

Most of the subjects expressed surprise that the first trial did 
not prove more difficult. Some found it as easy as the backward 
running. The same introspections were given : an adaptation of 
the usual control imagery to the new situation, as checked up 
by the experience of actually going through the path and attend- 
ing to the sensory recognition element. M. R. F. who used some 
visual imagery in test 6, as she had in Experiment I, reported 
herself as unable to visualize segments of the mirror maze, and 
consequently she relied on verbal and kinaesthetic cues. She 
found the process no more difficult however than that involved 
in test 6. J. W. H. and E. C. P. reconstructed their visual 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 39 

images, making them "mirror" in form, to suit the condition. 
They reported them just as vivid as ever, equally stable, equally 
adequate for the purpose they served. The objective records 
for tests 6 and 7 were strikingly similar. 

Test 8. This was in reality an elaborate series of tests de- 
signed as objective checks on imagery. The subjects were re- 
quired to read aloud, to repeat different jingles in terms of 
auditory imagery, to follow a visual diagram perceptually, to 
following a moving light with the eyes, while tracing through 
the maze. They were given various tasks to do with the left 
hand while using the right in going through the path. Tests 
to eliminate and to control eye movement were introduced. 

Our tests elicited the results characteristic of many tests for 
imagery : they practically amounted to general distraction tests. 
The tests were continued in the hope that even if they were of 
this nature, certain relative results would be obtained that would 
bring out the desired factors. That is, it was assumed that if any 
one of the tests were continued indefinitely, it would prove to 
be relatively more of a distraction test for the imagery aimed at 
than it would be for other forms of image processes. We were 
disappointed in this respect. 

The results from the auditory-verbal tests, in the case of 
G. M. F., were relatively satisfactory. This subject was made to 
go through a maze for a number of trials, at the same time 
repeating "Mary had a little lamb," continuously to herself. She 
testified that it interfered seriously with her verbal formula. 
She was forced to "slip in" her verbal directions, between the 
words of the verse she was asked to repeat. The result was no 
errors, but a perceptible increase in time. 

The visual distraction tests were productive of no positive 
results. They simply interfered with the attention involved 
in going through the maze. With E. C. P. the verbal distrac- 
tion tests disturbed her visual imagery fully as much as did the 
visual tests. 

Certainly, however, these tests offered no possible basis for 
challenging the introspections of any subject on the matter of 
imagery. 



40 F. A. C. PERRIN 

In connection with tliis series, three small and comparatively 
simple mazes were learned by each of the subjects by three respec- 
tive methods of presentation of the true paths, (i) For the 
first maze the subject was required to memorize before starting 
a verbal set of directions which were typewritten and handed 
to him. They included directions for the true path, not for 
the cul-de-sacs, and began as follows: "^ inch up — 4 inches 
to right — 4^ inches to left — i inch down," etc. The sub- 
ject was required to memorize this accurately before he was 
allowed to start in the maze itself. (2) In the second case, the 
subject studied a visual pattern of the true path, from which 
the cul-de-sacs were omitted, drawn on paper, of the exact size 
of the path itself. (3) For this presentation, the blindfolded 
subject traced through the maze to be run with entrances to all 
cul-de-sacs blocked. 

The subject was asked to retain his hold on the maze in terms 
of the imagery used in the presentation of the path. He was not 
allowed a trial until he had satisfied the experimenter that he 
knew the path he was about to trace. 

No subject was able to comply with the instructions as to the 
manner in which the path was to be retained in memory. 
E. C. P. studied the visual pattern as drawn and remembered 
it in the appropriate imagery. She also succeded in committing 
to memory the verbal formula in verbal terms, but was unable 
to refrain from translating this into a visual image when started 
in the maze. G. M. F. and M. H. S. H. were unable to remember 
the visual drawing as a visual image, but reinforced the scant 
image they got by verbal comment and kinaesthetic aids, before 
they attempted the maze itself. These three tests convinced the 
subjects that they had not been in error in their respective reports 
as to the imagery they normally employed. As for the objec- 
tive results, the learning of the verbal set of directions proved 
to be by far the most difficult and irksome task they were asked 
to do. The learning by visual presentation was much easier for 
all, the learning by actually traversing the maze was accomplished 
with the greatest facility by all. There was little or no evidence 
of any correlation between the method of presentation and the 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 41 

image technique of the respective subjects as to relative ease 
in learning. 

2. Significance of the results obtained from tests 

The data briefly given represent a summary of the evidence 
contributed by the tests. It substantiates the introspective testi- 
mony to the effect that the control of the maze learning process 
was largely an ideational matter. The significant thing, for in- 
stance, as brought out in the "mirror" test, was the ability of the 
subject to adapt his visual or other image, to manipulate it, rather 
than the fact that his idea was expressed in certain structural 
terms. Little evidence offered itself to indicate that the indi- 
vidual mental processes of any subject were relatively more ade- 
quate for some of the conditions than for others. 

C. EXPERIMENT II 

While the present investigation was concerned primarily with 
the activities of the human subject in the pencil maze, as a study 
of a definite learning process, it was thought desirable to intro- 
duce into the experimental work a maze through which the sub- 
ject actually walked. The object was to determine whether or 
not different learning processes were involved in the two mazes 
calling for different kinds of physical technique. In other re- 
spects, the conditions were kept the same. The subject was 
blindfolded, was given practically the same directions used before. 

I. Description of maze, and method 

(a) The maze: The experimenter was saved the immense 
amount of time and labor necessarily involved in the construction 
of such a maze by the offer of one admirably adapted for the 
purpose of the experiment located in Forest Park, Chicago. This 
is one of the amusement parks of the city, and the maze, called the 
"Mouse-trap," had been used as a pleasure devise for several 
years. None of our subjects had seen it or heard of it. 

A diagram of this maze [Fig. 4] is given on the opposite 
page. It was duodecagonal in shape, with the various paths 
arranged in concentric fashion, leading to the exit in the centre. 



42 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



From the exit the subject ascended a circular stairway, and by 
means of a boardwalk on top of the maze, extending from the 
center on one of the radii and leading to a stairway outside the 
maze, he descended, thus obviating the necessity of returning 
through the maze. 




Descending 
Stair ^ 

Figure 4. The "Mouse-trap." 

The "Mouse-trap" was constructed of sections made of wire 
netting, bordered and held together by angle-iron. The wire 
was of uniform size, about a 12-gauge, woven into a diagonal 
i^ inch mesh. The maze rested upon an even wood floor, 
elevated about 6 inches from the ground. There were as many 
sections, in any one partition, or in the outside wall, as there were 
sides of the duodecagon around which the partitions extended. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 43 

The maze was covered by the wire netting, divided into 12 sec- 
tions, each section corresponding to a sector of the top. From 
floor to top the height was 7 feet; each ahey was of uniform 
width, 2 feet 4 inches. The length of the sections making up 
the outside wall was 12 feet 2 inches, so that the circumference 
of the maze measured 146 feet. The exit box in the center, from 
which the stairway ascended, had a diameter of 9 feet 4 inches. 
All openings or doors were of the same width as the alleys. Two 
box-like areas were located, as is seen in the diagram, in section 
I of the maze. One of these, which is referred to as Box i, was 
8 feet in width, 93^ feet in depth; the second enclosure. Box 2^ 
was of the same width, and was 4 feet 8 inches in depth. 

The maze was in the open, and side i, on which was the 
entrance, faced the north. The floor was perfectly level. 

{h) Method of conducting the experiment: The subject, after 
entering the park, was led directly to a small building about 60 
feet northeast of the maze, conveniently situated so that he did 
not see any part of it. There he was blindfolded as in Experi- 
ment I, and led to the entrance. He stepped upon the platform, 
rested his two hands on the two sides of the entrance door, and 
waited until the experimenter mounted the overhead walk and 
gave the signal, "start." 

The directions and instructions given in the preceding experi- 
ment were modified to the following extent : The subject is 
permitted to use both hands as he wishes, getting with them all 
the tactual cues possible. (This allowed him to feel the floor if 
he so desired, but only one subject resorted to this, in one trial, 
and he soon gave it up as useless.) He was permitted to walk 
forward or backwards, run, or carry himself in general as he 
saw fit. The maze was considered learned when the subject 
had gone by the shortest route from entrance to exit three times 
in succession without error. The mention of more than one 
possible path was made for this experiment in the same manner 
that it was in the previous one. In this case, however, there 
was an actual option of paths. 

The experimenter stood quietly upon the platform and wrote 
down, in addition to the time, a literal account of the route each 



44 F. A. C. PERRIN 

subject followed for each trial. This was not an especially diffi- 
cult task, as the actual time involved in walking gave the observer 
ample opportunity to take complete notes of everything he de- 
sired to record. The experimenter was careful, except in one or 
two exigencies, to say nothing to the subject, who, however, was 
encouraged to express his introspections or comments aloud, 
to any extent which did not act as a distraction. The subject 
was told absolutely nothing of the plan or construction of the 
"Mouse-trap." It was simply "a maze," which he was to learn 
by walking through it. When the learner reached the exit box 
at the end of the first trial, he was told to "stop." In the ensuing 
trials, he had no difficulty in recognizing it. He was led, still 
blindfolded, over the walk, down to the ground, and back to the 
building mentioned, where the bandage was removed and the 
introspections were called for. 

Owing to the distance of Forest Park from the psychological 
laboratory, it was practically necessary for the subject to make 
the trials in succession, with intervals of 10-15 minutes for rest 
and introspections. Each subject spent a good half day at the 
performance ; two of them made two trips before they learned the 
maze. The experiment was conducted in October, 191 1, and the 
following were induced to act as subjects: J. R. A., M. R. F., 
W. S. H., E. W. B., R. B. O. 

2. The objective behavior of the subjects in the maze, 
and the nature of the learning process 

(a) General description of behavior: There were very few 
individual differences to be noticed in the behavior of the sub- 
jects. They proceeded very cautiously, especially for the first 
few trials. Both hands were employed in feeling the sides of 
the alley ahead for the openings. Several times during the first 
or second trial the subjects became so engrossed in the search for 
openings that they ignored the possibility of blind endings in 
the path, and a few unlooked for bodily contacts with the ends 
of blind passages resulted. This happened a few times in the 
later trials, as the result of over-confidence in their ability to 
guage the lengths of various passages. As they learned the path, 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 45 

the speed was increased in familiar regions from a blind man's 
walk to a brisk half-walk and half-trot. Most of the learners, 
when they had reached openings, would stop for the purpose of 
studying or attempting to remember their location. When either 
of the two boxes were entered, the subject would as a rule keep 
one hand in contact with the side, for the purpose of retaining 
his orientation, and reach as far out as possible with the other. 
No subject attempted walking backwards, or any other pro- 
nounced variation from the regular procedure. They would occa- 
sionally stop and face in different directions, in an attempt to 
get a better orientation. 

One subject, J. R. A., in the absence of directions to the con- 
trary, wore gloves in practically every trial. Several of the sub- 
jects at different times availed themselves of this protection from 
the metal. As will be mentioned below, this did not interfere 
with the tactual discrimination employed. 

(b) Nature of the learning method: The variation in method 
in evidence in the pencil maze was not so pronounced in this 
experiment. The introspections were more similar to those of 
M. R. F. in the normal maze. They indicate a more persistent 
attempt at studying out situations. No subject reported com- 
plete reliance on the hit-or-miss method of H. F. A. The fact 
that the subject had more time to think or plan in the "Mouse- 
trap" partly acounts for this, and the reports indicate that the 
greater complexity of the maze itself called for more intensive 
study. There was however a rather sharp fluctuation between 
periods of study and directed exploration and periods of aimless 
trial and error with four of the five subjects in the first trial. 

(c) A report by trials of the learning behavior of one of the 
subjects, and a brief description of the learning of the others: 
In the following account, references to segments of the maze 
are abbreviated as much as possible. Thus, 2-3 refers to the 
general segment corresponding to the first three sectors of the 
maze to the left of the entrance, while 2-4 on B indicates one 
path in that segment. The designations given in the drawing of 
the maze are followed in this description. The record of R. B. O. 
was selected as the one best suited to give the reader an adequate 



46 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



Un\\nown 



description of the type of learning activity elicited in the "Mous- 
trap, because this subject had the most difficulty with the maze, 
and the steps in bis learning were more elaborated. The reports 
of the other subjects had implied in them the same activities 
found here. 

(i) Subject R. B. O. : Trial (I). This subject occupied i 
hour, 15', and 47'' in finding the exit to the "Mouse-trap," and 
at the sacrifice of 112 errors, in his first trial. His exploration 
was divided up as follows: (a) In the first attempt he turned 
right and entered 11-12, which, with the 2-4 section through 
Box I, he went through several times, (b) He started left from 

the entrance and ex- 
plored section 5-10 at 
length, but worked back 
to the entrance before 
getting further on the 
true path than E. (c) 
The third attempt was 
largely a repetition of 
(a), (d) Again he fol- 
lowed A around to 10, 
failed to find the exit, 
and ended up in Box i. 
This was followed by a 
Figure 5. Drawing by R. B. O., end of first pj-Qion^gd entanglement 
trial. Figures 5-10 are exact reproductions of f ^ & « 

drawings made by the subjects. m sections 2-4 and II- 

12, during which Box i was entered several times, (e) The exit 
was finally gained in a last effort in which the whole region 5-10 
was worked over in detail. 

The report, like the behavior, followed M. R. F. in her first 
trial. He successively alternated between trying to keep his bear- 
ings as he went, and giving himself up in an aimless fashion 
to whatever he chanced to find. This variation of working 
methods did not carry with it any perceptible change in objective 
behavior, but the subject kept the experimenter informed of his 
fluctuations by such comments as : "Now I'm not going to think 
for a while," and "Guess I'll study this region." Like M. R. F., 
his knowledge of the maze acquired as the result of the first 
trial was vague and confused. [See Figure 5.] Like J. R. A., 
referred to later, he had conceived the exit to be on the outside 
and was controlled largely by the general idea of working in that 
direction. 

Trial (II). In his second trial, the subject again started to 




E-ntrance 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 



47 




Entrance 

Figure 6. End of trial 2. 



the left, came out through Box i to A, which he followed to 10. 

He called A a circle. He became confused by the doors x and y, 

and found himself back at the 
entrance. A second attempt 
was largely a repetition of the 
first, but resulted eventually in 
his gaining the exit. Time 
iy"-2^'\ errors 31. 

The main idea the subject 
got from this trial was the 
circular nature of the paths, in- 
dicated in his drawing. [Figure 
6.] Several places were recog- 
nized as familiar. He was very 
much bothered by the two doors 

X and y, and could not figure out what connections they made. 
Trial (HI). After going through the region 11-12, through 

Box I, and gaining the entrance by way of a, the subject gave 

the information aloud that he had learned something: "If you 

go straight across the Box (i.e., 
along B) you come out at the 
entrance. Therefore avoid that 
path." In the obvious attempt 
to profit by this discovery, 
R. B. O. after entering the Box 
again by his circuitous route, 
searched around for other exits. 
This led him into D, and the re- 
gion 2-4 was thoroughly ex- 
plored in an attempt to find the 
circular path. This process 
was repeated, until in despera- 
tion he decided to retrace from 
the Box to the entrance, and 
instinct" would 
As a result of this 
retracing, he got started on A, 
entrance to 10, and finallv made 



own 




Entrance, 



Figure 7. End of trial 3. 



then go where 
guide him. 



followed it around past the 
the exit. 

R. B. O. describes this trial as "pretty much hit or miss." He 
doubts if it added to his knowledge of the path — he rather thought 
he knew less than at the end trial (II). [See Figure 7.] 

Trial (IV). The subject did not learn from the last trial's 
experience that he should start directly to the left. Accordingly 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



he started on ii-io and found himself as usual m the Box. As 
a result of a considerable amount of exploring in 2-4, he decided 
on door d as the correct way out of the open space. In an at- 
tempt to act on that conclusion, the subject repeatedly walked 
back and forth in C D E F, in the region 2-4. After this explora- 
tion he concluded that B after all was the correct way to escape 
from the Box, and after more experimentation he discovered 
that b and a led him from the Box to the circular path. Once in 
the region of the doors x and y, however, his difficulties were re- 
newed, but he finally reached the exit. 

R. B. O. describes this trial as much more systematic than the 
last two. He did more planning, more rational exploring. He 
was able to do so because turns and passages were becoming 

familiar, and he could re- 
tain more in memory, and 
therefore think better. 
He describes the process 
as one of "exploring, and 
building up the path." 
His actual knowledge of 
the maze, however, as ex- 
pressed in his diagram, 
does not differ much from 
what he had known 
before. [See Figure 8.] 
Trial (V). In this trial, R. B. O. learned to start to the left 
directly from the entrance, and thus avoid 11-12. This he calls 
a purely accidental discovery. He made no headway, however, 
with the regions concerned with x and 3,'. No matter what way 
he turned, he got back to the door a again — he did not know 
whether or not there were two doors. His knowledge of the 
maze was increased, but every new fact, he stated, was the 
result of accident : "The best intelligence I have doesn't get me 
anywhere." 

Trial (VI) objectively represents the greatest drop in the 
learning curve, but it was the result of chance, the subject 
thought, and did not represent any correlated addition to his 
conception of the path. 

Trial (VII). In this trial the center of study shifted entirely 
to the doors x and y. The net result of an exploration in that 
region he expressed as follows: "Turn any way you want to, 
at this door, and the chances are that you find yourself back at 
it after a short time." He repeatedly, after reaching x by turn- 
ing into B from A on 10, would continue on B to 5, come dowm 




Figure 8. R. B. O.'s : first conception of X 
and Y. End of Trial 7. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 



49 




C and find himself at the same 
door again ; or would turn cor- 
rectly at X, come back on D, 
and again find what he thought 
was the same door. He studied 
long on this problem, but was 
unable to figure out what possi- 
ble arrangement of paths and 
doors could result in such an 
experience. The first explana- 
tion that he gave was that the 
maze was a figure 8, and that 
the true path intersected at this 
door. He reports himself at 
the end of the trial as "Com- 



pletely baffled — I 
than I did at the 

Trial (Vni). 
trial was made 



know less 
beginning." 
While this 
with only 



^^ Exi't 

Figure 9. Second idea of X and Y. 
Early part of Trial 10. three errors, he made no pro- 

gress in the difficulty of the last trial, and still believed the maze 
was a figure 8. [See Figure 9.] 

Trial (IX) was a repetition of (VHI). 

Trial (X). The intellectualizing in this trial consisted in a 

prolonged attempt to 
imagine different spatial 
possibilities, and explain 
his experience in terais of 
them, of the region in the 
vicinity of the two doors. 
The diagrams drawn by 
the subject represent his 
three conceptions of the 
region, in the order of their 
elaboration. [Figure 10.] 
Trials (Xl-Xn-Xni). 
No errors were made in 
'these trials and the maze 
was called learned. Since 
the explanation he had last 
elaborated ivorked, he "let it go at that" as he said in the last 
trial, and concerned himself only with the task of making the 
right turns. 




£ntrecncc 



Figure id. Final idea of X and Y. Trial 10. 



50 F. A. C. PERRIN 

(2) Subjects E. W. B. and W. S. H. 

The records for E. W. B. and W. S, H. were similar to those 
of the subject just described, but indicate less trouble with the 
maze. Neither of them had the difficulty with the doors x and 
y that was the source of R. B. O.'s confusion. The drawings 
they made after each trial are quite comparable with those 
reproduced. 

The learning- of W. S. H. offered one peculiarity, inasmuch 
as he was unable to learn the maze technically, in the trials he 
made because of the fact that he did not discover the shortest 
path. This subject, at the end of trial (XIII) reported the 
maze "learned" — that is, he had gone over what he considered 
the true path three times without error. He had, however, 
incorporated the section 11-12 into his route, and hit the true 
path after going through Box i and door a. He had not doubted 
for an instant that this section was part of his regular course. 

Since the experimenter had asked for the shortest path, he 
informed the subject that he had not fulfilled the conditions of 
the experiment in this respect. The statement was made that 
there might be an absolutely new path, or that his error con- 
sisted in not discovering one or more short cuts in the path 
learned. The subject then started on a new trial. 

In this new trial W. S. H. started directly to the right several 
times, and attempted to discover a short cut from Box i. After 
each attempt he followed the old path, and worked in 5-10 for 
a shorter route in that region. Curiously enough, in one attempt 
he started directly to the left and followed the shortest path 
to X, but he got confused in that section, retraced, and found 
himself back in Box i again. On the basis of this experience 
he dropped the idea of starting directly to the left. After two 
more trials in which no more headway was made, the lateness 
of the hour prohibited additional experimentation, and the maze 
was called "not learned." 

(3) Among the remaining subjects, M. R. F. had the most 
difficulty, with E. W. B. as a close competitor, while J. R. A. has 
the smallest number of errors and the minimum amount of time 
to his credit. The first trial of M. R. F. occupied i hour, 20', 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 51 

and 56'', and resulted in 175 errors. The chief landmarks she 
discovered in the early part of the trial were the ''box," and path 
A, which she described as "some considerable curve." As in the 
case of R. B. O., the doors x and 3; were the occasion of much 
wonder and not a little disgust. The first trial was characterized 
by sharp alterations between the methods of trial and error, and 
attempted systematization of her attempts. On the whole, her 
learning seemed to follow the procedure shown by R. B. O. The 
efforts of E. W. B. in their essential aspects were in turn very 
similar to those of R. B. O. and M. R. F. J. R. A. started in 
with the preconceived scheme to follow consistently the right side 
of the path. This led him in his first attempt almost directly to 
Box 2, but it also led him back to the entrance from that place. 
Although conscious that the path seemed to be a kind of narrow- 
ing spiral, the conception of a side exit was sufficiently strong to 
shut out any idea that it was in the center. The exit was discov- 
ered by pure accident. J. R. A. elaborated a definite verbal 
formula, which read, beginning at the end of A on 10, "right' — 
left — right — left — right — right — left." With its aid the path 
was learned successfully in short time. 

3. Summary and analysis of some of the specific aspects 
of the learning 

(a) Imagery, and sensory processes: In general, image and 
sense material functioned in the same manner that it did in the 
first experiment, but some differences in the behavior of these 
processes in the respective mazes were in evidence. The tactual 
element was emphasized much more strongly, as was to be ex- 
pected from the fact that in this experiment the hands were 
actually employed in feeling the sides of the maze. Since, how- 
ever, the partitions were made of homogeneous material, and the 
openings were similar in size and construction, the subject did 
not succeed to any marked extent in recognizing familiar land- 
marks by tactual cues alone. One subject, R. B. O., searched the 
floor for irregularities to serve as points of reference, but was 
not successful in this attempt. The hands and arms were used 
mainly in informing the subject when doors were reached, and in 



52 F. A. C. PERRIN 

keeping him from walking into blind alleys, rather than in making 
fine discriminations. Hence those who used gloves found that 
they did not seriously interfere with this tactual function. 

The reports on imagery follow closely those made in the pencil 
maze. Verbal processes seem to have been called upon somewhat 
more freely, both by way of comment and elaboration of formula. 
Verbal material was used in two ways ( i ) in the ''building up" 
process, of discrimination and association — that is, in studying 
out situations. (2) It was employed to fix landmarks or re- 
gions of crisis — that is, the verbal formulas used consisted of 
directions, associated with particular doors. While R. B. O. 
knew the maze in terms of visual imagery, he had used verbal 
material in building up this knowledge, in working over con- 
fused details. W. S. H. also used verbal material in this way, 
and consequently reported it as dropping out towards the close. 
E. W. B. used words to "start" himself — e.g., "Now I'll do 
so and so." 

Visual imagery was reported by W. S. H. to be more accurate 
than the verbal or kinaesthetic which he also employed. It was 
the visual scheme which "set" him in the right direction at 
diverging paths, as over against kinaesthetic, which was more 
general and vague. But M. R. F. used relatively less visual than 
she did in the pencil maze. 

No subject reported the use of only one type of imagery, as 
was done by one subject in the pencil maze, W. S. H., who 
represented a combination, used verbal in some regions, kinaes- 
thetic in others, both mixed with visual. This using of different 
kinds for different segments was also reported in the preceding 
experiment. 

The slight differences we have noted in the use of imagery 
may be merely matters of individual variation, or they may be 
explained by the fact that the trials were longer in time, than in 
the pencil maze, and allowed more time for studying or memo- 
rizing, and as a consequence elicited more verbal material. It 
was not evident from the introspections that imagery was em- 
ployed in different ways, although the body itself was in motion 
in this experiment, while it was a stationary point of reference 
in the pencil maze experiment. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 53 

(&) Hahit and Attention: We did not discover the appear- 
ance of habit, in the sense of paths being run unconsciously, to 
the extent that it was manifested in the pencil maze, nor did the 
introspections indicate much reliance upon this factor when it did 
appear. Probably this latter statement is the more significant 
one. In the pencil maze, the subject made, in any one path, a 
vigorous sweep with the pencil and was stopped rather violently 
by the end of the path. The greater complexity of the act 
of walking in narrow confines, and the fact that sudden contact 
with the end of a passage involved physical discomfort, was the 
explanation the subject gave for the greater amount of caution 
used in the "Mouse-trap." 

Again, there was more variation of objective behavior possible 
in this maze. Any given sequence of turns was actually made 
proportionately a less number of times. In any cul-de-sac in the 
pencil maze, the subject who had entered it, was forced to "back" 
out. Cul-de-sac regions in the "Mouse-trap" were open at either 
end, such as 11-12, or B C D E in 5-7. 

The introspections on the last trials however, disclosed on 
the part of R. B. O. and W. S. H. a decided tendency to let 
down on the active attention formerly used — a stage which in 
the pencil maze was the fore-runner of automaticity. 

The attention during the learning was directed in the same 
manner that it was in the preceding experiment, and but one 
point of distinction appeared in the reports. As before, it was 
either retrospective, engaged with present experiences, or antici- 
patory. In this latter aspect of its behavior, the reports in the 
pencil maze were to the effect that it was concerned with the 
turns to come as expressed in some image form. In the park 
maze, there was a report from M. R. F. that her attention was 
at times concerned with a more general state of expectancy, or 
surmising, or guessing. Other reports seemed to indicate a 
tendency towards this same type of anticipatory attention. As 
the maze became controlled, the anticipation, as before, was on 
the turns in front of the subject. The distinction seemed to be a 
relative one. 

(c) Discrimination, Memory and Recognition: The fact was 



54 P. A. C. PERRIN 

mentioned above that the maze was composed of homogeneous 
material, and that fine tactual discrimination was impossible. 
Discrimination of the less immediately sensory kind, that in- 
volved in ascertaining the nature of the paths and cul-de-sacs, 
had in it therefore, less of the purely sensory element than the 
activity in the pencil maze. It was of the kind that called upon 
the ability of the learner to interpret experiences by thinking, 
applying concepts. 

It was assumed by the experimenter that the subject would in 
the first trial, as a matter of discrimination and interpretation 
of direct sensory experiences, gain the idea of the segmental 
and curved nature of the paths, and would be able to interpret 
the paths as belonging to a concentric system. Since the sub- 
ject kept one hand in constant contact with one of the walls, and 
since the lengths of the segments decreased as he went towards 
the center, it was thought that the angle of 30° would be suffi- 
cient to furnish him ample cue for this conception. 

As a matter of fact, all of them did note that the paths were 
irregular. One other subject, with M. R. F., observed in (II) 
that the path A had "some considerable curve." They were a 
long time however in getting the concept of the nature of the 
paths; and they were decidedly late in hitting upon the idea 
of the concentric arrangement of the paths. Some of them 
hardly got the idea at all. The drawings reproduced above 
sufficiently indicate the tardiness of the subjects in discriminating 
and interpreting the sensory experiences of the maze. 

Inasmuch as discrimination did not differentiate the various 
paths to a degree that each of them presented distinct peculiari- 
ties in curvature and length, the number of regions that early 
became definitely familiar was small. Box i was a landmark 
for everybody from the start. The doors x and y were 
distinct from others doors, but being in themselves alike, they 
were a source of confusion to all of the subjects. The region 
11-12 early was recognized, inasmuch as it was a series of al- 
ternating paths without outlets. The region 2-4 was the area 
of greatest confusion. It was complex in arrangement without 
offering landmarks, and it was not learned by any subject. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 55 

In the pencil maze, the fact that the body was a fixed point 
of reference aided the process of discrimination and recognition, 
since it, (i), gave the subject a fairly accurate idea as to what 
part of the maze, (right, left, upper, etc.) he was in; and, (2), 
gave the subject an immediate cue as to the direction of any one 
path. In the "Mouse-trap," the absence of this reference point, 
together with the fact that any one path was not a straight 
run, but was composed of segments, and was therefore curved, 
tended to make these judgments much more difficult. The park 
maze, presenting as it did, more variations in cul-de-sacs types, 
instead of offsetting this disadvantage by way of holding out 
more individualistic segments, resulted in confusion, because of 
its complexity. The most difficult region in the pencil maze, 
was the most complex cul-de-sac, 6-9, which was simply an in- 
verted capital T. As compared with the 3-4 region in the park 
maze, it was exceedingly simple. 

Memory in both mazes was obviously employed in two ways, 
(i) Remembering the path, after it was once learned, was one 
of the things the subject would be assumed to effect. Practically, 
this meant, however, the ability to remember crucial turns in the 
path, where opportunity for error was present. J. J. T. and 
others, when the pencil maze was learned, were not able to 
describe the true path, since they had memorized only the im- 
portant segments of the path. (2) Studying the way out of 
difficult regions consisted largely of calling up and applying 
memory experiences. 

The second function of memory was relatively put under more 
strain in the "Mouse-trap" than in the pencil maze. Once they 
were learned, the two respective paths were remembered with 
relatively equal ease. While the route in the pencil maze con- 
sisted of 32 turns as over against 9 in the other, the important 
thing was the number of opportunities for error in the two 
paths. There were 6 cul-de-sacs discharging into the true path 
in the pencil maze, and 9 in the park maze, but only two of these, 
X and y, proved especially difficult to remember. 

We did not find that the differences in physical technique in 
the two mazes influenced the process of memorizing, by way of 
makino- it either more or less difficult. 



S6 F. A. C. PERRIN 

(d) Illusions: Evidence has already been offered to suggest 
that, as in the pencil maze, the number of spatial misconceptions 
was pronounced. The reproduced drawings given above indi- 
cate the nature of these illusions or misconceptions. 

In another way, this phenomenon was brought out. The sub- 
jects were allowed to see the maze after it was learned. Most 
of them expressed intense surprise at the small size of the 
"Mouse-trap" when actually seen. For W. S. H. it dwindled 
down to one-half its size. R. B. O. made the proportions in the 
same directions, 5 to i. Other subjects were more numerically 
conservative in the same judgment with the exception of 
E. W. B., who reported the maze as larger; not smaller, when 
actually seen. This subject had made rather accurate estimates 
of dimensions while learning the maze, but some of the essen- 
tial ones had been smaller than the segments measured. 

{e) Emotion and Affection: The "Mouse-trap" seemed to 
elicit the unpleasant reactions more than did the mazes used 
before. The work was more physically fatiguing, and the feel- 
ing of being hopelessly lost was more in evidence. M. R. F., 
towards the close of the first trial, was once at the point of de- 
claring that she could not learn the maze. There was, however, 
a corresponding elation when significant discoveries were made. 
Only in the case of W. S. H. was the feeling of being baffled 
in evidence towards the close, when he was directed to discover 
the shorter route. This, with the fatigue that had developed 
by that time, influenced the course of his learning. 

Emotional disturbance, however, played a positive role in the 
learning of this, as well as the other difficult mazes. They rep- 
resented periods of intense consciousness, in the same way that 
periods of mental effort meant a heightened consciousness. In 
either case, this consciousness was called into being when the 
need of readjustment was imperative. Current psychological 
doctrine asserts that cognitive activity functions in times of 
conflict, and while it assumes that emotion also arises under 
similar conditions, it has not assigned to that state any definite 
function. That function, in the maze learning process, is indi- 
cated in the introspections. « 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 57 

The subject described his efforts, while under the stress of such 
excitement, as pure trial and error; but they actually represented 
an entirely different thing from the listless, random exploration 
that was on other occasions characterized by the same subjects 
in these terms. In the first place, the subject was more, not less, 
sensitive to the significance of the attempts he made. He was 
decidedly on the alert for possibilities. Hence, discoveries made 
during these periods were utilized and reacted upon as quickly 
and efficiently as those which were the result of careful study. 
Secondly, the effort was not directed by any interpretation or 
theory — they were practically thrown to the winds. As a result, 
openings were entered that were normally labeled as cul-de-sacs, 
and avoided. It was the effort of the drowning man to clutch 
at the last straw; and such an expedient often turned out to be 
highly successful in the maze. S. M. R. discovered the exit 
of maze M in such a period during which, out of sheer despera- 
tion, she entered the cul-de-sac complex which in her rational 
moments she had avoided.^ In general, emotion was the incen- 
tive to a more inclusive series of exploratory movements than was 
the case when these attempts were controlled by ideas. Emotion 
very often meant increased effort upon new lines, made possible 
by the discarding of old conceptions and theories ; but the 
value of the reactions was not lost sight of, hence they were often 
productive of positive results. Obviously, emotion carried to 
the extent of surrender, to a cessation, rather than an increase, 
of activity and effort, would defeat its own purpose, as it very 
nearly did in the two cases mentioned. 

(/) Thinking: The fact that all the subjects who had serious 
difficulty with the maze alternated frequently in the first trial 
between periods of active study and periods of relatively aimless 
trial and error has been mentioned. It indicates that there were 
definite periods in the subjective aspect of the learning process in 
which the higher mental activities of the learners were called 
into play. This fluctuation also characterized the subjects in the 
pencil maze, possibly to a less extent. 

The experimenter assumed, at the beginning of trials, that the 

^ Cf. Experiment III. 



58 F. A. C. PERRIN 

"Mouse-trap" afforded more opportunity for study, for thinking 
out situations, than did the pencil maze previously employed. 
Its cul-de-sac formations were more complex, and a richer 
variety of experiences, it was thought, would present material 
for a more complex type of mental reaction. 

As a matter of fact, our assumption turned out to be correct 
inasmuch as the attitude of the four subjects resembled that 
of M. R. F. in the pencil maze more than it did that of H. F. A. 
For J. R. A., the maze was learned too easily to elicit that sub- 
ject's method of thinking out such situations. The quality of the 
attempts at rationalizing, however, seemed to be quite compar- 
able with those brought out in the previous experiment. 

None of the subjects guessed or reasoned that the exit might 
be in the center, rather than on the outside of the maze. Predi- 
lection was against them, it is true, on this point : those who had 
previously worked with animal mazes were accustomed to the 
side exit formation. But after J. R. A. had in the first trial 
followed the true path almost directly to the center, and had 
discovered rather definitely the concentric nature of the paths, 
it did not occur to him that the exit was possibly there. Two 
subjects reported that in the first trial they were definitely work- 
ing for the outside. They did not question the presumption that 
the exit would be here. 

As in the pencil maze, and to a greater extent, general working 
ideas were in evidence' — definite rational methods of attack. Thus 
J. R. A. and M. R. F. resorted to counting their steps in specific 
places where estimations of lengths were desired. The scheme 
to follow all turns to the right, or to the left, the plan of R. B. O., 
(IV), to locate various central points of reference, and work out 
in all directions from these, and even the deliberate adoption of 
a random hit or miss method are examples of the general control 
ideas — ideas that were the result of definite judgment to the 
effect that they might prove efficient. 

The actual efficiency of these general methods was extremely 
hard to determine. J. R. A. hit upon a plan that resulted in 
speedy learning. M. R. F. conceived the same idea, but it did 
not work for her. She had also, in Experiment I, in the corre- 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 59 

sponding trial (I), attempted and dropped this working scheme. 

The extended study R. B. O. made of the doors x and 3; has 
already been described. It seemed in every way comparable with 
the study made by M. H. S. H. of the cul-de-sac 6-9 in the pencil 
maze. It certainly involved the mechanism of the reasoning 
processes : it was something more than sensory discrimination, 
or imagining, or memorizing. But the actual solution was an 
accidental discovery. 

The difficulty of labeling the type of mental activity in evidence 
was as obvious in this experiment as in the previous one. 
W. S. H., after being informed that he had not discovered the 
shortest path, actually did go directly from entrance to door x 
in his endeavor to find the short cut. His attitude was one of 
sharp attention — he was on the lookout for cues, he was doing all 
the thinking he could do. But with all that effort, he did not 
interpret sensory experiences in an adequate way. Systematic 
thinking seemed to be extremely difficult, or impossible. 

4; The objective results 

The objective records, presented in the form of curves, show 
a relatively different distribution of time and error from that 
of the pencil maze. A greater proportion of effort was centered 
in the first trial, in this experiment, and the ensuing trials are 
more free from irregularities. 

The introspections, and the fact that the records from the 
pencil maze employed in Experiment III are comparable with 
the results from the ''Mouse-trap" in this respect, indicate that 
the cause of the relative difference in the distribution of effort is 
to be looked for in the plan of the maze, rather than in the fact 
that it was a maze calling for a different physical technique, or 
other factors. 

The reports on the role of discrimination and memory ex- 
plain the relatively greater emphasis on the difficulties of the 
first trial. By far the most difficult part of the maze was the half 
on the entrance side. This was practically one system of cul-de- 
sacs, since only one door opened into it from the true path, in 
addition to the option offered at the entrance. An immense 



6o F. A. C. PERRIN 

amount of exploration was necessary for the subject to learn not 
to enter door a and not to start to the right. These items, once 
learned, were easily remembered, while the actual scheme of 
these cul-de-sacs was speedily dropped from memory. On the 
basis of similar records from Experiment III we might assume 
that a maze of this type would tend to throw the emphasis on 
the first trial, while a maze consisting of a long true path, with a 
number of cul-de-sacs distributed along its course, would give 
a curve characterized by a less pronounced initial decline, and a 
more uniform distribution of irregularities. 

As in the preceding experiment, it was obviously not easy to 
correlate efficiency with any one abstracted activity. Some of 
the simplest mental operations seemed to have involved in them 
a rather complex type of mental organization. 

D. EXPERIMENT III 

The results of Experiments I and II had indicated and em- 
phasized an apparently paradoxical behavior of the rational 
aspect of the learning process. The fact had been made evident 
in every introspection that the subject employed in his learning, 
not a number of isolated activities, such as imagery, discrimina- 
tion, and others, but a more essentially complex type of reaction. 
Sensory discrimina:tion had involved in it, for instance, imaginal 
and conceptional factors. Yet for all this complexity of the sub- 
jective aspect of the learning, the actual attempts at systematic 
reasoning were crude in the extreme, as measured by the simpli- 
city of the problems when presented visually. It was thought 
not only desirable but necessary to conduct an experiment espe- 
cially designed to emphasize the ability of the subject to think 
coherently and systematically, or to reason. Accordingly, 
Experiment III was conducted with this object in mind. 

In order to control this special phase of the learner's activity 
for the purposes of a more exact investigation, two conditions 
were observed in the experiment. (I) The subject was in- 
structed to take an overtly rational, thinking, reasoning attitude 
towards his learning, even if he became convinced that such a 
procedure did not count towards the greatest efficiency. In the 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 6l 

preceding tests, it will be remembered, he was permitted to 
take any attitude he saw fit. (II) Two mazes were built, which 
in addition to offering difficulties similar to those encountered 
before, presented special formation designed to elicit the maxi- 
mum amount of reasoning. 

I. Apparatus 

(a) The mazes employed were of the pencil variety. For this 
experiment, and for future investigation, the writer designed 
a maze base, upon which any alteration in maze pattern could 
easily be made. Upon the upper surface of a solid oak base, 
I4>4 by 20 inches in size and i>4 inch thick, two series of 
parallel grooves were cut, extending from side to side and from 
end to end, so that they intersected at right angles, and cut the 
upper surface up into a complete checker-board. The grooves 
were uniformly }i inch in thickness, >4 inch deep, and >^ 
inch apart. Into them were inserted steel strips to serve as 
the sides of the maze paths, and between these strips brass 
flooring was laid. With an assorted number of brass and 
steel strips, any desirable combination of path sequences could 
be easily constructed. For the open space built into maze M, 
(see diagram. Fig. 12, and description) a solid brass plate, of the 
same thickness as the flooring, was laid. The exit of this maze 
was in the interior, at the end of a blind passage. An electric 
buzzer was used to inform the subject when he had attained it. 
The brass flooring in this passage was cut off so that it lacked 
i>^ inches from extending to the end wall, and the floor was 
continued by a thinner strip of steel, slightly raised above the 
wood base, and free at its outer end, so that pressure upon it 
made an electric contact with a wire run through the base of the 
maze, and started the buzzer. Two mazes, L and M, were con- 
structed with this apparatus, and used in Experiment III. 

{h) Object of the designs of the tzvo maces: Maze L. The 
pattern of the path formations in this maze was elaborated to 
present difficuhies by way of the similarity of two different paths. 
Similarity in the mazes previously used had made discrimination 
extremely difficult. In maze L it was attempted to arrange the 



62 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



paths in such a manner that this difficulty could be overcome by 
a relative reliance upon reasoning processes, as over against a 
trial and error method. [See Figure ii.] 

The object of the experiment in brief was this : Two paths, 
A and B (in maze L), were of sufficient relative length to set 
them off as distinct land-marks for the learner, but since they 




fxit Entrance 



Figure ii. Maze L. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 63 

were similar in position, and in their respective turns at either 
end, the difficuhy would be in ascertaining whether they were 
really two paths or one. Efficient learning, however, depended 
upon the subject's ability to determine this point: if from the 
lower part of the maze only one long path ascended to a cul- 
de-sac in the upper part of the maze, then it was useless for the 
subject to traverse this path, since he had to return by it. If there 
were two paths, there was the possibility that both were sections 
of the true path ( as was actually the case ) . 

It was obvious that each subject would : ( i ) raise this issue 
as just formulated, or (2), would assume without question on 
the start that there was but one path, only to be disillusioned later, 
or (3), would perceive on the first trial that there were really two 
paths. It was correctly assumed by the experimenter that one 
of the options indicated under (i) or (2) would characterize 
the learning of the majority of the subjects. As a matter of 
fact, only two of them saw from the start that there were two 
paths, and accordingly, no special difficulty presented itself to 
these two. 

The two paths were parallel, and so alike in length, that dis- 
crimination on this score was found to be practically impossible. 
At the top, the three turns and one cul-de-sac leading off from 
the paths were similar ; at the lower end, both turned to the right, 
then up, then right, with an option on the last turn. One dis- 
tinguishing mark was made. Path B had at its immediate upper 
extremity a square opening to the left, while A at its top per- 
mitted the subject to turn only to the right. 

It was assumed that logically a reasoner, in attempting to 
discriminate or differentiate between two things in any problem, 
would seek some distinguishing mark. In this case, that mark 
was put directly on one of the paths. Logically, the subject 
could formulate the problem as follows : "If there are really 
two paths, the possibility is that one of them presents some point 
of difference from the other. This distinguishing sign is to be 
sought, first in the path itself, and next, in the respective se- 
quences of turns at either end." 

Maze M. In designing this maze [Fig. 12] the experimenter 



64 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



was prompted primarily by the fact brought out in the "Mouse- 
trap," where the controlHng idea that the exit was to the outside 
of the maze distinctly prolonged the learning of some of the 
subjects. In maze M the exit was at the place marked X and 
the subject was informed when he had reached it by the fact 
that a buzzer was sounded. He was given none of this infor- 
mation however, at the beginning of the first trial. Once again 




EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 65 

we attempted to give the subject a cue which could be reacted 
upon in a reasoning way. Path A completely encircled the maze, 
and brought the subject back to the entrance. Since it offered 
no other opening to the outside, the exit must be somewhere 
within the maze. 

It was assumed that most of the subjects would make the tour 
of path A in the first trial. As a matter of fact, all of them did. 
Since they were asked to use a rational attitude, to keep them- 
selves alert for material to think about, it was thought that such 
a formation would offer the necessary data. 

Two additional points were in mind in designing both mazes : 
(a) Several cul-de-sacs, like those in the park maze, represented 
deviations from the typical cul-de-sac formation, such as that 
found in the first maze we employed. It was desired to study the 
reaction the subject would make to a new situation, under the 
new instructions, and to determine whether or not new construc- 
tions deterred the learning. (2) The subject was asked to learn 
the shortest route. As a separate problem, it was desired to 
ascertain the manner in which the subject could prove that the 
path he had learned was the shortest. 

2. Method 

The greatest innovation introduced into the method was the 
instruction mentioned, that the subject was to do all the thinking 
and reasoning possible in his learning. Since any given problem 
often extended over several trials, it was thought best to hold 
them in succession, with 10-15 minute intervals between trials. 
The maze was clamped to the table after the manner described in 
Experiment I. The subject faced the entrance side of each 
maze, so that U in maze L was called the upper or top side of 
the maze. The following subjects learned the two mazes : 
J. R. A., J. W. H., M. H. S. H., M. R. R, S. M. R., C. N., 
W. S. H., R. B. O. 

3. Results 

(a) An analysis of the learning method employed in the sohi/- 
tion of the different problems presented: The observation of 



66 F. A. C. PERRIN 

the objective behavior gave sHght indication only, if any at all, 
that a different working attitude had been imposed upon the 
learners. It was practically impossible to tell by the keenest 
watching what schemes, if any, were being acted upon. The 
subjects however found that by commenting aloud they were all 
the more able to formulate their ideas, and in this way, as in the 
park maze, the observer was given a check on introspective 
reports and on behavior. 

(i) The parallel paths in maze L. The plan of the parallel 
path arrangement was a source of serious trouble for most of 
the learners. Maze L proved to be the most difficult maze to 
learn employed in any of the experimental work. The following 
summarized accounts give the essential aspects of the methods 
employed by the learners. 

(i) Subject R. B. O. This subject spent two hours and a half, 
distributed over five trials, in the situation offered by the maze — 
(the greatest total time spent in learning the first maze. Experi- 
ment I, was less than one hour). In trial (I) A was noticed 
and commented upon as being extremely long when he first 
ascended it to the U region. Here he became confused, and 
when he finally found the exit through B, he assumed that there 
was one path only, leading to a complicated cul-de-sac at its top. 
No progress was made in trial (II). In (III) he hit upon the 
idea of two paths, but in an attempt to escape from U he 
repeatedly came down A, thinking it was the escape path B and 
he began to doubt his theory. In (IV) the subject went almost 
directly from A to B through U several times, but conceived the 
the idea that he was traveling in a circle, and refused to come 
more than half way down either path. He began to question 
all the more the possibility of two paths, and by the end of the 
trial he definitely decided there was but one. Trial (IV) was 
continued into the next day, as the subject was fatigued at the 
end of 36 minutes. In this second attempt the subject spent a 
full 15 minutes trying to find the exit without going up A. He 
resorted to the scheme of going half way up this path, and 
then retracing down, because, as he said, "I find the exit after 
coming down this path." Several times he reached the first 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION ^ 

t„™ off A at U but refused to go farther: "I know all about 

" °erritory, (i.e., knew it was cul-de-sac reg.on) and don 

end to gel mixed up in it." He did finally as a last resor 

X ,1 th: region and found himself in J. Then he made h 

discovery. "There arc two of them, because the other one 

doesn' have this notch at the top." The subject had entered J 

se'eral times before, in the preceding trials, but rt had not at- 

"\10 sSTh. S. H. The idea that there were two 
paths'occ:rJed to this subject in (I) but she located tre es.nd 
L path to the right of the ascendmg one, on the basis ot the 
l"r,aes*etTc feel o^ arm stretch. By (IV) she was skeptical of 
t tteory of the two paths: "They feel just alike, but some- 
tils get out after coming down the long stretch, and some- 
tinrls I don't." In (VII) she spent 23 minutes attempting to 
n he exit without going up A, and on this basis assume tha 
after all there were two, and also assumed, without cpie ti n th 
the one to the right was the descending path. By (IX) she was 
n p-r^us again- "There really seems to be but one pa^l. and 
the turns at either end are alike, but some imes , do S" t lead 
me to tlie exit." That is, like the other subjects, she often came 
me to inc c B Tn CXI it occurred to her for the 

down A thinking it was B. In (A) it occurrcu 
first time, in describing the maze in her introspection, that . 
tl" a Lending path were to the left, the two paths must intersec 
sol :vhere in I since she had found that the exit was to the^ 
of the entrance. In the next trial the -bject descended B twice 
in succession, went around the "Square," and back to U. bhe 
ITcl su.. however, that she had taken a <^^^ ^^^% 
in., path each time. Therefore she was certain that A and B 
imersected in L because they both led into the same region 1. 
hat vicinity. In answer to a question, she said she could no 
prove it, or reason it out-there was nothing to reason ...But 
there did not seem to be room at the bottom or two pa hs so 
nearly alike, and stretching over so much territory^ Tta^ or 
there was perhaps only one path after all. In (XI I and XIV ) 
he accidentiy noticed that a joint in the floor in the lower end 
of A was more uneven than the one in B. There must be two of 



68 F. A. C. PERRIN 

them, therefore. This being settled, trial (XVI) was directed at 
a more specialized problem : since she had established the identity 
of the two paths, the question was to tell which she was entering 
from U — they both felt alike, and she had no way of telling until 
she reached the bottom. In (XVIII) she discovered J for the 
first time (she had been repeatedly entering it), found that a 
similar projection did not mark A, and soon learned to go through 
this part of the maze without error. She had gradually given up 
the idea that A was to the right of B. 

(iii) Subject M. R. F. The learning of this subject followed 
very closely that of M. H. S. H. Like her, she raised the question 
of the possibility of the existence of the two paths in the first 
trial, and similarly, she thought that the ascending path was to the 
left of the descending path. This suggested at once however, 
the two must intersect somewhere at the bottom, since she was 
sure of the correct relationship of exit and entrance. The sub- 
ject resolved to perfect the route she had learned before she at- 
tempted a study of the situation. By (VI) she had the path 
fairly well learned, and in this trial also she discovered that J, 
which she had noticed before, was at the top of B only. This 
landmark she retained as a cue to tell her on which path she was 
descending. The subject finally decided that she had misjudged 
the position of the two paths. 

(iv) Subject J. R. A. This subject in his first trial ascended 
and descended A several times before finding B. He immediately 
assumed, at the close of the trial, that the two paths existed, 
because one got him out and the other did not. He also correctly 
assumed that the return path was the outer one, because it seemed 
to extend farther up than path A. The rest of the learning pre- 
sented no serious difficulty to the subject. 

(v) Subject C. N. This learner believed after the first trial that 
one long path ascended to a cul-de-sac territory at the top of the 
maze, and that it was not necessary to go up this path at all. 
Most of trial (II) was spent in an effort to find a shorter cut to 
the exit, but after 20 minutes endeavor in this direction, she 
decided to try the possibility of the long path. In doing so she 
discovered J, remembered that she had found it in coming up, 
and concluded that there were two paths. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION * 

Of the other two subjects, the reports of J W. H. follow 
those of J. R. A., and the account of W. S. H. .s suiidar to that 
of the subject just described. 

(2) The location of the exit of maze M. The d.scovery of the 
inner exit of this maze was practically a matter of accident as 
Tw s in the case of the park maze. M. R. F. m her first nal 
directly made the circuit of the outside path A several t.mes, m 
one of which she kept consistently to the outs.de wall. Al- 
though she recognized the nature of the path, as leadmg her 
back to the entrance, and although she had the idea rather defin- 
itely in mind of finding the exit somewhere on the outs.de of he 
^we the fact that it could not be there d.d not suggest .tself. 
Ser motive, when she did finally approach the .nter^r, was to 
get off this path. She reports however a vague aiid "O"" °«' 
ftate of questioning l.ov. the surroundi..g path would aftect the 

''1 WH reports that he did wonder vaguely about the exit 
after he had made the circuit of A. He did not formu ate h.s 
tnto a definite question however. He had conce.ved of the elec- 
tric wiring as a device to mark cul-de-sacs, and d.d not connect 

it with the exit. ^ . i • „ 

T R A stated that his definite working scheme of making 
all the right turns tended to exclude questionings about the ex.t 
He too :-ent around A, sticking closely to the outs.de, w.thou 
perceiving that the exit must be within. This report .s an exact 
duplicate of the testimony of the same subject m the Mouse 

"" nI subject got the suggestion of the exit after encircling the 
maze, although all of them did so in the first tr.al before they 

located it. . . ^i „^ rr,n 

(^) The perception of new format.ons .n the mazes. Lon- 
clusWe evidence had been offered in the park mtrospect.o..s .n 
the case of R. B. O. with x and y. and with the other subject 
in regard to the exit, to indicate that a novel arrangement of 
paths or cul-de-sacs, not o.rly taxed the ability of the subject to 
interpret new situations, but was directly the cause of a delay 
in the learning. Each subject applied some concept to the new 



70 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



Figure 13 
S. M. R. 



The "Square" of 



kinaesthetic and cutaneous experiences : the one that gave the 
most immediate and satisfactory meaning to the experiences was 
accepted. Such conceptions proved to be inadequate quite often, 
from the point of view of practical results. 

Subject S. M. R. in maze L offered an instance of such an 
inadequate interpretation, in her idea of the "Square." [Fig. 13.] 

For a full period of 20 minutes in 
trial I she refused to come down 
path B, because of the fact that the 
first time she had done so she went 
directly around the square and up 
B, and conceived the situation to be 
as she represented in her drawing. 
As was the case with so many con- 
ceptions concerning the maze, it was 
a matter of assuming a situation 
without question, rather than a 
process of formulating an option, or 
criticizing the conception. An example of this was brought 
out in Experiment I, in which the subjects so many times went 
to a turn in the true path, and retraced, thinking it was the 
blind ending of a cul-de-sac. 

About half the subjects in their first experiences with the 
"Square" interpreted it as did S. M. R., but they discovered 
their mistake before the idea resulted in serious harm. 

The record of this same subject presents another instance of 
uncritical judgment of maze formations in maze M. Early in 
trial ( I ) she got into the vicinity of the exit, and conceived the 
whole area immediately to be cul-de-sac territory. She refused 
for a long time to enter door a because, having located it as the 
entrance to that region, she said : "Anybody ought to have 
sense enough to avoid a place like that." This conception, after 
she had explored thoroughly the possibilities of the surrounding 
path A, delayed her reaching the exit for a full half hour. 

Several subjects in maze M started to the right and came back 
on B to regain A, in the same way that W. H. S. made 11-12 a 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 71 

part of the true route in the "Mouse-trap." They accidently 
discovered sooner or later the nature of the paths. 

The cul-de-sacs to the immediate right of the open area in 
maze M proved to be the most difficult situation to formulate in 
the maze. The open space itself was peculiar without being 
complex, and the one thing that made the path easy to learn. 

The general result may be summed up in the statement that 
new situations retarded the learning, unless they were so simple 
and distinct that they afforded definite cues for orientation, in 
which cases they facilitated the learning. 

(4) The shortest path. The discovery of the shortest path 
proved to be a matter of difficulty to only two of the subjects. 
The others, after having once learned to turn left on C, easily 
learned to enter the open space through the upper left hand area 
and go diagonally across it. The special possibilities as to rela- 
tive lengths in general were perceived, as a matter of sensory 
discrimination, without effort. 

M. R. F., however, learned the route as turning to the right 
on C, then up, and across the top of the maze to the left on the 
corresponding path. Her discovery of the left side route was 
purely accidental according to her reports, and was the result 
of going too far to the left in one trial as she was making this 
trip, and coming back to the entrance. W. S. H. did not learn 
the shortest path from the open area to the exit until after he 
had habitually turned up after leaving it, and had come down 
the path directly over door a. His discovery was accidental, and 
similar to that of M. R. F, 

(5) The nature of the attitude employed in Experiment IH. 
The subjects were unanimous in their statements that the 

method employed, in spite of heroic attempts to follow the in- 
structions given, was not materially different from that employed 
in the other mazes. The nature of the type of reasoning they 
found it possible to do was practically the same as that indulged 
in when they were left to their own method. The common state- 
ment was that they had nothing to reason on. The data had to be 
acquired by trial and error, and the significant discoveries were 
made in such hit or miss performances. 



72 F. A. C. PERRIN 

They did assume an attitude, somewhat forced and artificial, 
differing slightly from their natural method of attack. This was 
found to consist in (i) an attempt to 'think-out' certain possi- 
bilities by way of theory or conjecture, or to follow a systematic 
method of exploration. Thus W. S. H., maze L (I), speculated 
as to which side of the maze the exit might be located. Thus 
J. R. A. and others followed one side of the path, exploring all 
its possibilities first. (2) A second characteristic of the process 
was the more acute attention paid to experiences and cues. This 
attention was concerned at times with a definite object : several of 
the subjects, after they had formulated the difficulty in maze L, 
were overtly on the lookout for distinguishing cues. What they 
did not do was to search for these cues in a systematic manner. 
This was practically an impossible task, so they reported, since 
the major part of their attention had to concern itself with im- 
mediate orientation, and since also they were forced to stay in * 
the maze paths — had they been permitted to jump from one 
section to another, more systematic exploration might have been 
possible. The two distinctions given were relative only : it was 
a process of slightly more emphasis upon methods that all of the 
subjects employed, and whidh they could not help employing. 

{h) The objective results: The sudden decrease in the time and 
errors in the 2-5 trials indicate without exception, in maze L, 
the period in which the nature of the two paths had been dis- 
covered. The extended continuation of errors resulted from the 
fact that the rest of the maze still offered a series of minor prob- 
lems, in the shape of small cul-de-sacs, easy to escape from but 
difficult to avoid. The explanation given in the account of the 
objective records in Experiment III applies without exception to 
the records from this maze. The same type of abrupt decrease 
also characterized the results from maze M, and the fact that the 
time and error curve based on it is slightly more irregular finds 
sufficient explanation in the fact that the maze itself was more 
complex. The stage in which the subject learned to avoid the 
entire right part of the maze is marked by the fall of the curves. 
The open area in this maze undoubtedly saved it from being 
more difficult than maze L, the most difficult one we designed. 



S. M. R. R. B. 0. 


W 
H 


O <0 ID [^^ ID t^ t^ I^ CM — -^VO <Js "^^£3 On ON O O Ov 1^00 CNO»J^"^i^i^CgCM (ul- 

-*^'^<^<^r^O<^iof^ioThriCMCN)oi<McsfOfO">-iO)M04p^CNCso)Mro Jj^-i 


lO 
IT) 

'^ 

"lO 

V 

t-' 


CO 


ioO'NO^'^t^o<c^"0<^'-'^o>-'Ooie<"OCMoo\oot^oooom 

LO 

V) mVO (N M ■-< M W hH 


On 

Co 

4= 


NO 

oi 

PO 


X 

^ 

^ 


H 


(^00 iomc^coo\r^i--f^ooO 

O 0\ t^ fO On 

'ODO O ONOt^POM " ^On-*0 
CO 1^ lO (N ^ M 


in 

0) 

h 


d 

"CN| 


(A 




t^iOOCN)-t-0'-iO<^'-iiN0g0iOnOOOO 
Tf On "^ " <N « " 

^ IM M " 
"bOOPOO^t^fNltN^t^OCV|NOt~^.t-vTt>-<^'+ 

^MMwCMfO!N0)0)rr)<^-^'^"^rotSCMCN)i-H 

CO n <N " 0) t^ 


On 

2 

'on 


NO 


Uh 

^ 
§ 


H 


^OCO O O On O ON t^NO O\O^nu-,i^Or^'yi-^m^^\O^i^a0O^\^^~OOO 
OOCOCN10)>-|<N"<N" CN) fO 

~b I-^ -^NO 0\ u~. t>. -t CO M ir> t^ O X 'OCO I^ O :^ (^1 NO NO ■-' Ol Cn| rf- 0| Tf h-i 00 r^ O 
>-<rOu-)-i-0'^00^<^01TrTtLnrof»0<r3fOCN)(MCN)(\)CN|tNTtrN)CN)CN)CN)Mi-Hio 

Vj'NPICNiHHi-roCNJCNIi-'" ro 


1— ( 
CO 

"o 


c. 

On 

00 

t— < 


in 




00 1^ lO On On rn in WCO NO ■+ ro O "I" t^l OnOO <M0i-'0000'<1- 
00no<N^ !NO^mi-i rooo -^NO On ro « m 

l-H (-1 

"io CNl Tf 1^1 O On fO t^ t^ r^CO NOOQnOnO ^lOt^Tf r^NO O O -^ ro 
ONOf^uO" T)-CN|(N)i-iroiOTrioi-OroON'-'i-'" " 


(M 

Os 

"On 

"o 


00 

CO 


u 




t^Tl-Oir)OroOCN10)OOCN)CN|O'-<OCN(CN)00OCNlCN)OOO 
M On"-) 

"bot-^^i^^oooo^-o)i^poi^t^i'~, ot^O"oot^mr^ 
■^■lM^o'T■^^o^coro-s^nPOCN^copocN^(>^•^^po^^o^^<^CNlCN| 

'^ o <^ 






<■ 


o 

u 

W 

S 


ooorxfo^O"00i-'ONO"0>-'wcN)OOoo 

■* rONO 1-1 CO 11 W 

V.O NOlOO ONOioOrssOOOrfO CO r^Np i-O Tj- o 
lOLOi-iOfOCNfOoOC^^CNji-ii-iClCNiroMtNCNiio 

-Q On t^OO w rO 


NO 
NO 


00 

PO 

NO 
CN) 
CN) 


3 

O 

d 


M r) ro •* iDNO t^QO On O i-i (N) PD ■^ "^no t^OO On O k^ M ro Tf lOVO 1^ OC On O •-■ 01 

MHHMHHl-IMMI-IMHHM(NCgCN<IMCN)0)CN)(\)CN<fOrDrO 


3 

o 


(U 

bo 

> 

< 



H 



H 



C^ 



X 




W 




^ 


rn 


•a 


-a 




k-. 


o 


o 






<u 


<u 



w 





X! 


E 


'*^ 


H 


s 

o 




u 


'. 


<-t-H 


t— 1 






-r1 


w 


a; 



H S 



d 

eq 




^ O ^ ^00 Tt- i-( H. O o o 

On 

* „ po t^ r^ N 01 m^o ir> rr} (^ 


"o 

oo 


01 


in 




CJ^ 01 M 0) >-( MM 

-1- 

"b\Ol^0 0lt^OONO^O>-"OO^u~jO"^f^"f^lO'^ ^00 01 ^ O t^ 'J^ 'O 
TtM-^iOii-)(*3rOO)rOO)01010iroroO)OoOO)oO'*01-^OlMM<v5u-)i-i-.i-4 

V "-1 0) WW 
43 


01 


01 

oi 
"oi 


1— ^ 




J^ re O O O O O 

"lO o " <^ fO 0\ o 
CO lO ro *-< •-• '-' 

0) 


o 

GO 

v> 

01 


0^ 
oi 1 

01 I 

m 

oo 


in 




i^CO ^VO vo PO O 0\ POVO VO >0 ^ ^ ^ 1^'X O t^ o o o 
fO ro 1-1 in lO 01 oo rOO « « 00 

"m t^ IT) m m 1^00 01 00 OvQD Tt-OO00fOOiOo-5t^Mt^ 
i-H M loo) 0) O POI-" u-)U-i-^r<)ir>in-^>-i cjooo ooooo) 


01 

0-) 
~0I 


01 

01 ! 






00 0\00 u^ lOVO O vo-^TtTa-Tl-LOi-H cooo iro^O c^fOOOONOOOO 
"oi O oi ir) lO m lO UK 1-^ O ID t^OO O iO lO t-^ O\C0 t^ -* O C\ 01 O »0 

MOO-sf^OlOlOll-lOlMMl-lOl-ll-HOlOll-HMMOOiOlOll-l 

"K i_i M M 0< ro 


On 
01 


t^ 1 

lO 






r^ '^ lo t^ t^oo to u^ -rt T^ lo ooco 00 -*a\-^"*o\^'^-*o o oi ovo^o o oi ooo^fomo O O 

tfOww i-hOI 1-c mOIwOIOIOJ 

Vxpor^o O'OO ^ Ti-iooi ONf^oi 01 'i-ONOt^r^i^too\o i^oi r^rs. loo t^ t^ On oo oi ro oi 

oocrjiOirjioO u-jirioor^M m -^m -rfo 01 ro>-i 01 OI 01 O roOl tOP0-+0 '^■^'^rOiOO-jM m 

"Koll-1 I-H OlMM l-l MM (\)m01 rOO 

01 


CO 
1-.' 


d 

d\ 


u 




OOOO O ■<*txO00 OVOVO OONO NOOOOOloOt^OOlOlOIOOONOlOlOlOlOloOiLnOliOtNro 

t^01l-(l-l010)P-lM HHOlW M -M 

mm 0\ i-t 01 i-iOO O moi -^roooo O O t^-^O l^l^^O poO O\-^in01 OOO irjioioi^rDqj'v- 
Tft^-^CO-^ iniD-rJ-uooi cooorotooo-^M M 01 01 COIO'^OI 01 01 rt rrimm M -^ ir, rr J c_| 

"moIwOI MMOl" ms^ 


in 

00 


OO 

d 

"in 






^V0000000i00\0010l000 

00 M M M 01 VO CO 

\bcoi-iooioocoino) o\ooi^ioio 

01 ro-^trOOO^'*" ^01 O01-. M M 

V) M 11 01 \o i-< 00 

M 


Vi 


vd 

\d 

01 


3 

m 


3 

O 

d 


1-1 01 CO ■* "O'O r^OO 0\ O l-l 01 oo •* vovo t^oo 0\ O n Ol oo ■* lOVO l^OO 0\ O >-< Ol fO ■* idvo t^ 
MMMMMMMMMM010101010101010l01MrorOroroooc»5ro<r> 


o 


to 

> 
< 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 75 

The last trial for several subjects, after the maze had been 
run three times without error, shows a sudden increase in time 
and errors. This was occasioned by the fact that many of them 
chose to perfect their route first, and then explore for a possible 
path, in compliance with the criterion established for learning. 
The last trials in such cases represent the time and exploration 
necessary to satisfy the subject that no shorter path existed. 

E. EXPERIMENT IV 

The reports from the preceding experiments were unambiguous 
to the effect that the different attitudes attempted towards learn- 
ing did not involve actual differences in method. The assuming 
of a reasoning point of view carried with it a more evident play 
of ideas, but these ideas as manipulated by the learner did not 
directly solve maze problems. The results suggested the possibil- 
ity that the conditions of the learning task made only one method 
possible, or at the most permitted deviations from this method. 
The evidence on this point was not conclusive, however, and an 
experiment was designed to bring out the variations possible. 

■ I. Apparatus and Method 

(a) Three similar pencil mazes were used in Experiment IV, 
one of which is shown in the diagram, Figure 14. The paths, 
yl inch wide, were cut through brass plates, 8 inches by 10 inches 
in size, and 3/16 inch thick. The mazes could thus be turned 
over and be used mirror fashion. The exit and entrance ends 
of the paths did not lead out of the mazes, but terminated blindly, 
like cul-de-sacs. To mark the exit, a brass wedge, fitting closely 
into the blind end of the path, acted as an inclined plane, and 
carried the pencil out of the maze, so that the subject knew im- 
mediately when he had completed the trial. The wedge could 
be placed at the end of any blind passage, and thus the exit as 
well as the entrance of the maze was variable. A wood base, 
covered by a plate of glass % inch greater in length and 
breadth than the maze, was used as its support. Four strips of 
brass, of the same thickness as the maze, formed the border of the 
top of the base. They enclosed a rectangle slightly larger than 



76 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



the maze itself, and thus allowed it to fit tightly upon the 
glass, upon which a sheet of paper could be placed for the pur- 
pose of preserving a graph. In addition to holding the glass, the 
brass border kept the maze firmly in place. The apparatus was 
easily clamped to the table. 



Exit Entrance 

Figure 14. Maze lb. 



{b) Method: The subject was asked to learn three mazes, in 
successive trials, each maze at a different sitting. He was in- 
structed to take toward each a separate and characteristic attitude, 
which was defined and explained as follows : 

(i) His "Natural" attitude. The directions were identical 
with those given in Experiments I and H. 

(2) An attitude of "Conscious Trial and Error." The learner 
was asked to make the affair as conscious as possible, to attend to, 
discriminate, and remember paths, but not to reason, or speculate, 
or indulge in ideational activity not directly concerned with the 
motor processes to be employed. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 77 

(3) An attitude and working method of "Surplus Activity." 
He was instructed to move as rapidly in the maze as he was able. 
He was to make no special conscious effort, save that necessarily 
involved in maintaining the speed called for. Since the distrac- 
tion tests mentioned in Experiment I had convinced us that 
complete distraction of the attention was impossible, the subject 
was not asked to concentrate upon some extraneous topic — that is, 
he was allowed to employ as much consciousness in the learning 
as the actual speed conditions permitted. 

The point was emphasized that a premium was placed upon effi- 
cient learning only in as far as it was accomplished in terms of 
the directions given. Several subjects had stated in Experiment 
in that the rational attitude was not conducive to the best learn- 
ing, and it was made plain that objective results were to be sacri- 
ficed for the attitude desired. 

In designing the mazes, it was attempted to equate them in the 
matter of complexity. In order, however, to eliminate the factor 
of the influence of the individual maze pattern, different mazes, 
were offered to each subject for each of the three methods. The 
mirror form was employed in two cases, but it was arranged 
that no one subject was given both the maze and its mirror 
form to learn. At the top of the columns in the tabulative state- 
ment [page 98] is found the number indicating the maze used. 

The subjects in this experiment were J. R. A., J. W. H., 
M. H. S. H., M. R. F., C. N., W. S. H., and R. B. O. 

2, Results 

(a) Reports of the different subjects on method: The sub-t 
jects were asked at the close of the experiment to write a detailed 
introspective analysis, based on a comparison of different methods 
used in all the mazes they had learned, in this and in the preced- 
ing experiments. The essential points of these analyses, ex- 
pressed as far as possible in the subjects' own terms, are as 
follows : 

(i) Subject M. R. F. The method employed in the "surplus 
activity" learning was somewhat different from that used with 
the other mazes. This was the result of the unnatural speed re- 



78 F. A. C. PERRIN 

quested in the performance, which interfered with the fixing of 
associations, partly by the rapid shifting of attention, and partly 
by the distracting effects of the disagreeable affective state, and 
the actual strain and fatigue involved. Because of this, seg- 
ments of the maze were learned as a hand-motor coordination, 
without conscious control. 

These segments, however, were those in which little opportun- 
ity for error was present. In times of difficulty such a method 
was inadequate, and the crucial turns were figured out by essen- 
tially the same method used in all the other mazes. The solution 
was delayed, however, by the conditions imposed. 

The attitude taken in the other mazes presented little variation 
in learning method. Where reason was requested, cues were 
followed up a little more consciously, and in the intervals between 
trials, the problems were studied a little more. 

On the whole, there was sufficient similarity between the dif- 
ferent methods to warrant their being considered as phases of 
one learning activity, but the "surplus" method represented the 
most pronounced divergence from the regular procedure. 

(2) Subject J. W. H. There are two methods possible by 
which a maze may be learned, but they are different only in the 
relative emphasis placed upon common factors. The first was 
represented in the "speed" maze, the second in all the others. 
Both involved discrimination and memory, but in the second 
instance this is more deliberate, more overt. It involves a more 
conscious attention on cues, and often conscious exploration to 
find these cues. More emphasis is placed upon the constructing 
and following out of a vi^-ual diagram. In the "surplus activity" 
maze, little emphasis wa& ^aid on the visual element — motor 
imagery was practically the only type used. J. W. H. was able to 
describe the true paths in all the mazes when learned, but he 
knew less about the cul-de-sacs in the maze learned by rapid 
movements than in the other mazes, although he was out of the 
true path a relatively longer time. This he ascribed to the fact 
that chance success through surplus activity characterized the 
learning in this maze, rather than chance success by means of 
deliberate exploration. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 79 

(3) Subject M. H. S. H. This subject finds only one method 
available in learning mazes. She attempted in the "speed" 
maze to learn it in motor terms — i.e., by letting each successful 
trial help establish a habit. She assumed that the true path 
would be traversed oftener than cul-de-sac paths, and that they 
would as a consequence be finally eliminated. But her expe- 
rience proved that this method resulted in false paths becoming 
incorporated into the true, hence conscious avoidance of cul-de- 
sac entrances was essential for every maze she learned. The 
learning by surplus activity approximated unconscious learning 
more than the other tests, but the methods employed were essen- 
tially the same for all the mazes. 

(4) Subject W. S. H. also reported that only one method 
was possible in the actual process of learning to run through a 
maze without error. The process is one of discriminatitig and 
remembering crucial points. Normally, every turn and path is 
attended to at the start, whether it presents chance for error or 
not, and those found free from dangerous situations are dropped 
out from consciousness. In the "surplus activity" learning, he 
attended only to those crucial regions, as a series of definite prob- 
lems, when they forced themselves upon his attention. There- 
fore there was more surplus ideational activity in the rational 
and natural methods — surplus in the sense that all of it was not 
absolutely essential to the act of learning. 

(5) Subject C. N. This subject made a two-fold distinction 
of methods on the basis of the voluntary attention paid to cues 
and suggested ideas when she made the learning a studied one, 
as over against the type of process represented in the "surplus 
activity" method, in which, through repetition of errors, the 
decisive terms were forced upon her consciousness. Her analysis 
follows rather closely the description given by J. W. H. and 
W. S. H., since it places rational learning as one extreme method, 
as opposed to learning by the method of rapid movement. She 
drew the distinction, however, in terms of the volitional effort 
attendant upon the one, as contrasted with the other in which the 
control ideas were forced upon her. 

(6) Subject R. B. O. The essential distinction that this sub- 



8o F. A. C. PERRIN 

ject's introspection gave him was that apparent to W. S. H. 
In any rational method of solving maze problems, the attention 
at first concerns itself with every experience and every suggested 
cue, although some of them are found afterwards to be non-essen- 
tial. In the non-rational method, these experiences are not at- 
tended to until either a chance success forces some of them upon 
the consciousness of the learner, or repeated entrance into a 
cul-de-sac does the same. In such instances, attention to them 
is necessary and involuntary, and is indispensable for learning. 

(b) Summary of the analysis: the nature of the method: 
The similarity of the different reports leaves no doubt that to the 
minds of the subjects the learning under different conditions 
presents simply phases of the some process. One aspect involves 
more than the other, of what was variously defined as conscious- 
ness, volition, effort. 

The different mazes called forth these distinct attitudes only 
partially. In the original pencil maze, and in the "Mouse-trap," 
there was a constant, almost periodic, fluctuation between these 
two extremes. Sometimes helpful cues were obtained with one 
attitude, sometime with the other. The fluctuations were due to 
fatigue, or to a shifting opinion as to the values of the two 
methods, or to the type of local situation in which the subject 
found himself. The testimony was unambiguous to the effect 
that in crucial points the idea of which way to turn, or not to turn, 
was necessary. At times the subjects were definitely on the look- 
out for such ideas, at other times the essential controlling infor- 
mation was suggested to them involuntarily. 

Of the two extremes, the one imposed by Experiment III, 
the other by the "surplus" method, the subjects were in accord in 
the statement that they were both artificial and futile. Neither 
was a "natural" method. They could not learn a maze by "rea- 
son," neither could they by a technique tending to eliminate the 
type of consciousness involved in the process — voluntary atten- 
tion, discrimination, judgment, suggested working ideas, memory. 
The "natural" method, and the method of "conscious trial and 
error" were found to be identical, and the latter phrase was 
accepted as a just characterization of the processes involved, if it 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 8i 

were taken to include something more than a mere passive reten- 
tion of cues discovered accidentally. 

Numerous writers have of late formulated a modification of 
the conventional antithesis between "trial and error" and "idea- 
tional" learning. Ruger^ mentions the fact that the hit-or-miss 
method was in evidence with his subjects in their attempts at the 
solution of puzzles. Colvin, who cites Ruger's results, refers to 
the trial and error method with human learners, but emphasizes 
the fact that the learning endeavors made by human beings are 
not aimless, but are controlled by anticipation of probable results : 
"When, however, we have reached a higher stage of develop- 
ment, particularly in man, we may assume, as we have already 
pointed out, that trial and error is something more than a hit-or- 
miss process through which an adjustment is finally secured. 
The trial becomes a conscious one, and is self-directed." ^ 

Correlating the results of this with the previous experiments, 
we conclude that, in general, the method of learning was condi- 
tioned by the jiature of the maze, rather than by the attitude of the 
learner. In proportion to the extent that the maze was complex, 
a greater amount of conceptual control and reasoning were called 
into play. In any simple maze, the method approximated a pro- 
cess of mere trial and error. A certain amount of discriminating 
and memorizing was necessary, and little opportunity was given 
for the play of higher processes. The learner has control over 
the method to this extent: whether the sum total of these activi- 
ties is to he represented in one trial, or is to be distributed over 
a series of trials, is largely a matter of choice. The indications 
are that the most efficient distribution is a matter of individual 
variation. The subject tended to set the pace in the first trial 
that was to characterize his ensuing trials, and he termed this 
his "natural" method of learning. The speed demanded in the 
surplus activity test was evidently too great. The subject was 
not given time for making or fixing associations. No experi- 

*Ruger, "The Psychology of Efficiency," Archives of Psychology, June, 
1910. 
^ Colvin, "The Learning Process," 1912, p. 2^. 



82 F. A. C. PERRJN 

ment was attempted to determine the speed below which effi- 
ciency would suffer. 

In difficult mazes, like the "Mouse-trap," simple memory and 
discrimination did not suffice to give the variability of behavior 
necessary in order to discover and retain the location of the exit, 
and the sequence of paths leading to it. Then, more general and 
conceptual ideas were employed : their function was to reduce to 
a minimum the number of trials, or to secure effective variability. 
Thus, had the general scheme of the maze just mentioned been 
given to the subject before he entered it, the bad records for the 
first trial would undoubtedly have been cut down. The problem 
was therefore largely one of ideational learning, and the expla- 
nation of the divergencies in the objective results is to be found 
partly in the fact that different conceptions were formed, of vary- 
ing degrees of correctness, and that all sorts of predilections 
entered into the process. 

F. THE LEARNING CURVES 

In plotting the curves, the percentage method of the elimina- 
tion of surplus values was adopted. This scheme was used by 
Carr and Hicks*^ in their paper. It seeks to measure in terms of 
percentage the rate at which excess or surplus time and errors 
are reduced to zero. The time not absolutely essential for the 
traversing of the maze is considered as surplus, and it is found 
by subtracting from each trial, the shortest time made in any 
trial. As might be assumed, the shortest time made is usually 
found in a trial without errors ; this is, however, not necessarily 
the last trial. Since all errors are surplus no similar subtraction 
is made. After the surplus time has been computed for each 
trial, the time and error records for the first trial are each given 
the value of lOO per cent, and with this as a basis, the percentage 
value of each of the ensuing trials is computed. The curve is 
then plotted upon the percentage results. 

The method has two advantages, (i) It brings the time 
and error records down to the same base line, in any trial in 

* Cf. Carr and Hicks, Human Reactions in a Maze : Jour, of Animal Be- 
havior, Vol. n, pp. 98-125. 



Trial No. 


Subject 


J. K. A. 






J. W. H. 




M. H. S. 


H. 




M. R. F. 






C. N. 




W. S. H. 


M. K. V. 1 


I Maze 


Ha llla 


la 


Ih 


lib 


Illb 


lib la 


lllb 


la 


llla 


lib 


lib 


lb 


llla 


la 


Ila 


lb 


lllb 


la 


lib 


Method 


Nat. T. & E. 


Surp 


Nat. 


T.&E. 


Surp 


Nat. T. & E 


Surp. 


Nat. 


T.&E. 


Surp. 


Nat. 


T.&E. 


Surp. 


Nat. 


T.&E. 


Surp. 


Nat. 


T.&E. 


Surp, 


I 




I '-17" 5'- 1 2" 


i'-3o' 


3'-45" 


2'-06" 


r-17" 


i'-24" -58" 


3 '24" 


-22" 


-42" 


-22" 


S'-i4" 


2'-28" 


-18" 


-22" 


4' -00" 


r-40" 


-55" 


l'-20 


-39" 
-23 
-24 

-I I 


2 




2 -27 1 -00 


-20 


-45 


-23 


I -01 


3 -38 I -04 


-09 


I -50 


I -08 


-35 


-18 


I -32 


-42 


-35 


-16 


-15 


2 -40 


-21 


3 




2 -45 -39 


-59 


-07 


-26 


-18 


2-48 -iX 


-36 


1 -40 


-20 


-29 


-27 


I -32 


-42 


-36 


-47 


-15 


-43 




4 




-45 -38 


-21 


-10 


-22 


-09 


2 -55 -31 


-35 


-29 


-16 


■ -14 


-28 


-17 


-08 


-15 


-17 


-18 


-51 


-15 
-18 


5 




-33 -IS 


1 -03 


-07 


-20 


-09 


-45 -20 


-51 


-17 


-"5 


I -01 


-20 


1 -00 


-09 


-•5 


-18 


-08 


-25 


-23 
-II 


6 




-36 -15 


-II 


-06 




-42 


I -02 -25 


-14 


-18 


-20 


-39 


-28 


1 -0, 


-09 


-14 


I -57 


-13 


-20 


-23 


7 




-35 -'9 


-II 






''J 


-47 -55 


-24 


-20 


-IS 


I -01 


-20 


-3^ 


-08 


-24 


-ii 


-06 


-23 


-24 


-07 


8 




-33 -26 


-29 






-26 


-25 I -30 


I -05 


-17 


-49 


-■s 


-18 


-38 


-07 


-22 


-\h 


-16 


-20 


-12 


-10 


<J 




I -00 -23 


-10 






-10 


-3^ -34 


-10 


-13 


-16 


-14 


-16 


1 -01 


-11 


-23 


-16 


-09 


-25 


-13 


-10 


lO 




-4 1 -20 


-09 






4-14 


I -04 I -04 


-0.; 


-13 


-14 


-24 


-17 


-20 


-12 


-13 


-II 


-08 


-20 


-'4 


-0<) 


II 




-14 -14 


-19 






-16 


-4« -4S 


-13 


-12 


-25 


-12 




-16 


-12 


-10 


-1 1 


-09 


-16 


-10 


-(x; 


12 




-46 -1- 


-10 






-15 


-30 -31 


-09 




-15 


-20 




-19 


-OS 


-TO 


-08 


-14 


-16 


-10 


-07 


13 




-21 -18 


-IS 
-16 






-20 


-21 -28 


-47 




-13 


-II 




-24 


-OS 


-0() 


-09 


-09 


-13 


-13 


-07 


14 




-17 -21 






-15 


-SI -52 


-IS 




-13 


-14 




-20 


-06 




-aj 


-«;» 


-13 


-10 


-oS 


IS 




-18 -20 


-13 






-07 


-IS -28 


-06 






-06 




-19 


-06 






-09 


-13 


-10 


-10 


20 




-i<) -20 


-10 






-16 


-20 


-38 






-08 




2 -01 


-06 






-08 






-05 


25 




-30 


1 -03 






-19 




-05 






-09 






-II 






-08 








30 




-13 


-08 










-OS 






15 






-08 






. -09 








35 




-20 


-17 










-12 






-06 






-08 






-ID 








40 




-50 


-18 










-10 






-06 






-09 






-06 








45 




-20 


-14 










-24 






-IS 






-08 






-06 








SO 




-16 


-W) 










-SO 






-08 






-16 














55 






-09 










-26 












-08 














6o 






-13 










I -01 












-17 














65 






-20 










-15 












-09 














70 




(Trial 94) 


-09 








(Trial 126) 


-08 
-12 








(Tri 


al 69) 


-08 
















Total 


16' 32" 21' 14" 


24' 43" 


4' 50" 


3' 37" 


II 45 


19' 49" 12' 24" 


50' 33" 


()' 1 1 " 


5 52 


1 1 ' 09" 


8' 25" 


9' 10" 


9' 00' 


4' 08" 


9' 10" 


10' 38" 


1 8' 30' 


7' 46" 


4' n" 




y\vcrage 


47.7" 22.1" 


1 5-7" 


48.3" 


43-4" 


" 


59.4" 41.3" 


24.0" 


33-7" 


25- 1 " 


13-3" 


50.5" 


41-4" 


9.1" 


19.0" 


38.5" 


11.2" 


34-0' 


24-S" 


1 1 .9" 



Tahi.k 3.— Time record, Experiment IV. showing results for the first fifteen trials, and for every fifth succeeding trial up to No. 70. The number of the last trial is indicated in parentheses in cases 
in wliicli it docs not fall upon a trial nnnil)er gi\en in the Cdlumn. Totals and averages are compuleil from the complete records. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 83 

which all surplus values are eliminated. In this way, it simpli- 
fies the task of ascertaining the number of perfect or nearly 



Percent 

100 



Time 

Errors. 




Trials / s 10 is ^ "^"zo 23 

Figure 15. Percentage Curve of J. W. H., Normal Maze. 

perfect trials represented in the graph. (2) The relation be- 
tween the time and error curves, i.e., the varying number of 
errors per unit of time, is readily estimated. For purposes of com- 
parison, two curves of J. W. H. are reproduced, one based on the 
percentage method, and the other upon absolute time and errors. 
(Figures 15 and 16.) One disadvantage of the percentage curve 
is that it is likely to be misleading when the graphs of two or 
more learners are compared. The records of J. R. A. and 
M. R. F. (Figures 23 and 24) would seem to suggest that the 
latter subject learned the "Mouse-trap" with the greater ease. 
Her time and error results for the first trial were i hour, 20', ^6^\ 
and 175, as over against 21', 37'', and 46 errors for J. R. A. 
But since the results of the first trial are given the same value 
for each learner, 100 per cent, the graphs do not afford a ready 
basis for a comparison of absolute results of the diffierent 
subjects. 

The curves based on the "Mouse-trap" and the Normal maze 
records were selected for reproduction since they were the two 
mazes learned without restrictions being imposed upon the learner. 
The tabular results of the other two experiments however readily 
suggest what would be the general nature of their curves, if 
they were actually plotted. Two features of the curves are es- 



Timt 



z'oo" 



I' 30' 



I'OO" 



Time 
Errors 




Errors 

so 30" 
0. 

Trials I 

Figure i6. Curve of J. W. H., based upon absolute time and error records, 
Normal Maze. A comparison of this curve with Figure i6 will show the 
points of similarity and difference in the curves. 



Vercenf 

100 





TriaU i 




^ la J! 10 ZS 30 3S f»4 

Figure 17. Percentage Curve, M. H. S. H. Normal Maze. 



W 



ifV 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 



85 



pecially prominent: (i) the rapid initial descent; (2) the pres- 
ence of a marked series of "steeples." The first especially 
characterizes the "Mouse-trap" curves; the steeples are more in 
evidence in the curves from the Normal maze. 

(i) The conclusion has been urged in a preceding section of 
the paper that, in as far as there is variation in the learning 
method, the variation is conditioned largely by the pattern of the 
maze itself. The results indicate that, on the objective side, there 
is a corresponding difference in curve characteristics. 



PercMt/ 



Trials / 




Time - 



2S \' 

5 10 IS ZO It 

Figure 18. Percentage Curve, G. M. F. Normal Maze. 



ML 




Normal Maze. 





Trials/ s 10 /f 20 

Figure 19. Percentage Curve, M. R. F. 

A maze, irrespective of the variable factor of difficulty, may 
be complex in two radically different ways. The path may in- 
clude a relatively large number of turns, and the individual cul- 



86 F. A. C. PERRIN 

de-sacs may be simple, consisting at the most of two or three 
segments — as, for instance, the "L" form of cul-de-sac. This 
maze would be difficult in proportion to the number of such blind 
passages. As opposed to this type, the true path of a maze may 
be simple, and the number of cul-de-sacs few, but if they happen 
to be in themselves complex, the situation that is presented to the 
learner is essentially different from that offered in the kind of 
maze just described. Of the mazes employed in our investigation, 
those used in Experiment IV, and sections of some of the other 
mazes fall under the first class; while the "Mouse-trap," Maze 
M, the parallel paths in L, and cul-de-sac 6-9 in the first maze 
used, represent formations of the second class. 

Our results indicate that a maze curve tends to show the 
rapid initial fall in proportion to the extent that the maze 
involves a short true path with a few very intricate cul-de-sacs. 
The true path itself is easily remembered when once learned; 
hence, assuming, as is actually the case, that it is learned in the 
first trial, only a few trials are required in order to perfect it. 
Obviously, other things being equal, the general slope of a curve 
is the more pronounced as the number of trials is cut down. But 
a complex cul-de-sac either taxes the powers of discrimination to 
the utmost, or proves to be entirely too formidable for them, 
and the practical result is that much time and labor is expended in 
order to learn to avoid the false opening. This was the case in 
the instance of door a in the "Mouse-trap." In maze L, the initial 
problem assumed a slightly dififerent aspect: the crucial thing 
was to decide whether or not the long path must be traversed. 

In a maze consisting of a series of simple cul-de-sacs, the 
learning effort tends to extend over a prolonged series of trials, 
each of which results in a slight addition to the detailed knowl- 
edge of the route. As in the type just discussed, the emphasis 
is upon learning to avoid false openings; but there are many of 
them, and only a few can be mastered in a single trial. The sim- 
plicity of each is a guarantee against the subject's becoming hope- 
lessly lost in the path, and in this way unduly prolonging the trial. 
The records of Experiment IV indicate clearly the curve be- 
longing to this type of maze. 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 



87 



It should be remembered that our resuks pointed to consider- 
able freedom for the learner in the matter of the distribution 
of his time. Hence, it is quite conceivable that one could de- 
liberately decide to learn as much of a simple maze as possible 



Z50 




S 10 IS 20 

Figure 20. Percentage Curve, E. C. P. 



25 
Normal Maze. 



30 31 



Vercent 
leo 





Trials / 

Figure 21. 



s 10 IS 20 ig n 

Percentage Curve, H. F. A. Normal Maze. 



in the first trial, by prolonged exploration. Such a procedure 
would tend to result in the type of curve that we have just asso- 
ciated with the more complex maze. This method was however 
not followed by any of our subjects, in the simple mazes, so 
that it would scarcely seem to be a natural way of learnmg. 



88 F. A. C. PERRIN 

On the Other hand, it would be impossible for a learner to 
distribute his time and errors in such a maze as the "Mouse-trap" 
in any other way than that shown by our subjects, assuming that 
the maze presented the same problem to him as to them. 

A prime factor that we conceive to be responsible for the 
sudden fall of the curve at its beginning has just been indicated. 
All of our records show, however, a general tendency for the 
curve to drop after the first trial or two, irespective of the scheme 
of the maze. Hence, another factor must be operative. The 
explanation of this tendency is to be found in the introspective 
reports. 

The reports show that without exception the net result from 
the first trial was a knowledge of the general spacial relations. 
The relation of exit to entrance, the general course of the true 
path, was acquired by everybody in the first trial. This was es- 
pecially obvious in the Normal maze, but was sufficiently in 
evidence in the "Mouse-trap" reports. 

The subject had for the second trial, therefore, a skeletal 
scheme of direction. Assuming that in the absence of detailed 
knowledge of the maze, he was as likely to enter cul-de-sac 6-9 
[page 4] in trial II as in I, in escaping from it, however, in 
the second trial, this general idea would tend to inhibit him 
from turning on H. In the first trial, he had no reason to assume 
that the exit was to the left of this region. As a matter of fact, 
several subjects testified to their surprise in discovering that the 
maze extended as far to the left as it did. This applies to every 
region in the maze, either the path or the cul-de-sac. 

It is to be remembered that in the first few trials the learner 

Ter loo 
Cent 



Time 

Errors. 




Trials / 5" 10 is zo ^ zf 

Figure 22. Percentage Curve, J. J. T. Normal Maze. 




EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 



89 



Percent 
too 




S 

Trkki 3 s 77/0 

Figure 23. Percentage Curve, J. R. A. The "Mouse-trap." 

did not recognize H or I as belonging to the true path, as distin- 
guished from 6. The abihty to distinguish which of a series of 
turns had led him into a blind ending was acquired only after 
more prolonged study of a region. Even a simple situation like 
13-14, when the subject entered it for the first time, did not come 
to him as a cul-de-sac, but as a runway making a right-angled 
turn. The subject, instead, found himself, after a series of turns, 
blocked by a blind ending. Hence, in the second trial, his con- 
trol was the dominant idea of taking any turn which led to the 
left. 

The behavior in the second trial was motivated by this general 
working scheme, as was also, to a large extent, the third. Spe- 
cific problems began to be raised in this trial, to be acted upon 
in the fourth. Since the control for III was practically the 
same as for II, but more specific and definite, a second decrease 
in time and error was to be expected; but since the essential 
aspect of the idea had functioned for the second trial, a less pro- 
nounced decrease would obviously result. The introspections are 
in complete accord with these suppositions. 




Figure 24. 



3 5 7 

Percentage Curve, M. R. F. The "Mouse-trap. 



90 



F. A. C. PERRIN 



?trttn\ 




3 5 J <) 

Percentage Curve, W. S. H. 



J I— 
// « 15 

The "Mouse-trap." 



Figure 25. 

(2) All of the pencil maze curves, and some of those plotted 
from the park maze records, disclose an irregularity marking the 
trials III or IV, and a series of fluctuations — the "steeples"' — 
extending over the following half dozen or more trials. There 
are a number of reasons which account for these irregularities. 
Some of these may be conveniently grouped together, as constitut- 
ing a general causal factor. 

The general reason why, in the stage of learning represented 
by the third or fourth trial, and extending throughout the learn- 
ing, fluctuations should occur, is to be explained by the fact that 
at this stage the control was rather definitely changed from a 
general spacial idea to a series of specific control ideas, built up 
by various factors, each tending to increase temporarily the 
time and error records. After the third trial, the process of learn- 
ing the maze resolved itself into a series of individual problems. 

Again, the reports from the "Normal" maze indicate the 
nature of these problems. The learner knew by this time that a 
rather complex cul-de-sac occupied the right section of the maze. 
He was interested, therefore, in learning definitely how to avoid 
it, either by fixing in mind the specific turns in the true path, or 
the openings in the path. His general scheme had been found 
inadequate to carry him through this vicinity safely. He was 
interested, not in working through this region, but in traversing 
it without error. We find reports of the subject's being "hope- 
lessly lost" in this region in the 3-5 trials, that we did not find 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 91 

in the initial trials. They were lost because their problem had 
changed, not because their general orientation was less known. 

Therefore, at this stage, in ascending path 6, not knowing yet 
its relation to the rest of the maze, the subject, actuated by a 
special motive, might: (i) be tempted to explore the region. 
This being the case, he was as likely to turn into H as to continue 
on I. A number of errors would result as a consequence. In 
fact, he would tend to take H rather than I, since his object was 
to discover the relation of the cul-de-sac to the earlier part of 
the true path, or the part that had led him into it. (2) The learner 
might be interested in fixing in memory, or in discriminating 
in turn the various paths of this portion of the maze. Several of 
the subjects spent a consderable amount of time in going back 
and forth between the end of 7 and 9, until the inverted T notion 
of the situation was established in mind. (3) In the case of 
being "hopelessly lost" in this region, as the result, sometimes 
of exploration, sometimes of merely an attempt to get through, 
a large number of errors were often scored. The subject would 
resort to an almost pure type of trial and error, in order to find 
the true path. Even in this, however, he was guided perhaps 
not completely consciously, not primarily by the general sense 
of direction, but by the more specific feelings of familiarity and 
knowledge of this region already acquired. He was more inter- 
ested in discovering the known part of the true path than he 
was in finding the exit. Hence, more errors would result when 
he was lost than in the earlier trials, in the same objective situa- 
tion. Any of the three procedures just mentioned would tend to 
raise the curve. 

The introspection brought out a number of specific but more 
or less interrelated explanations of irregularities in the curves 
during this period of definite maze problems. The first grouping 
includes those factors intimately involved in an attempt to work 
out a situation or problem consciously. These factors, or motives 
for behavior, were: (i) conscious exploration, with the object 
of studying any particular segment for the purpose of eliminating 
the non-essential parts of it. (J. J. T. VI, VIII, X, XVII, 
G. M. F., VI, and all other subjects at times) ; (2) retracing for 



92 



p. A. C. PERRIN 



Vtrcent 

1000 



trials / 




TTme 
Irrors 



3 5 7? 

Figure 26. Percentage Curve, E. W. J. The "Mouse-trap." 



Percent 
m 



Time 

V Erron 




Figure 27. 



3 5 f 1 ir 

Percentage Curve, R. B. O. 



3 

Trio&y 



The "Mouse-trap; 



the purpose of fixing in memory a certain segment; (3) misin- 
terpretation of the experiences, incidental to the study of a region. 
This did not always increase the time and errors. A second group 



EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 93 

finds its general explanation in the fact that attention and interest, 
habit and emotional conditions were in part variable factors. 
Hence we had reported, (4), distraction of attention, (E. C. P. 
VII and others), (5) general laxity of attention (M, H. S. H., 
VI, XII, J. J. T., VIII, M. R. R, XXXI), (6) over-reliance on 
automatisms, (J. W. H., VIII, XI, XIV, J. J. T., XVII). A 
third and most common cause of errors was (7) due to the 
tendency to resort to a trial and error procedure, as a result of 
fatigue, discouragement, accidentally getting lost, and various 
conditions. It is not implied that this method necessarily was 
the cause of more errors than would be the attempt on the part 
of the subject to maintain a more conscious attitude. 

The irregularities occasioned by the development of specific 
problems were necessarily involved by them. No study of a sit- 
uation could be possible without costing an expenditure of time, 
and of errors, under the marking system employed in the experi- 
ment. The tax on memory was too great to permit certain 
regions to be learned without frequent retracing through them. 

Increases due to the other factors seemed practically as unavoid- 
able. The demand upon the attention and memory was rather 
severe during the learning period, and assuming even the possi- 
bility of the subject maintaining a constant amount of attention 
during the trials, the problem of its distribution was a vital one. 
To the extent to which the subject concerned himself with the 
attempt to keep in memory a section just learned, throughout 
the remainder of any trial he must necessarily be somewhat lax 
in attending to the situations encountered. 

The reasons specified account for irregularities; they hardly 
explain the fact that these irreguliarities graphically should take 
the form of steeples. Or, in terms of the quantitative results, 
while they account for a sudden increase in time and errors at 
any given instant, they do not explain why this was invariably 
followed by a corresponding decrease in the next trial. 

The fact that each new trial meant a "fresh start" was a strong 
factor tending to safeguard the subject from carrying into any 
trial the bad effects of the previous one. Accidents in a trial 
due to laxity of attention, or reliance upon habit, seemed to put 



94 F. A. C. PERRIN 

the subject on his guard for the next trial. The emotional effects 
were as a rule not carried from one trial into the next. At the 
same time, however, a problem generally extended over a series 
of trials ; and to the extent that no special progress was made in 
any one trial, the records tended to be similar for the series. 
Hence the curves show the combined effects of the two factors. 

III. SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 
A. The nature of the learning process 

1. The human adult in learning a maze employs the conscious 
processes of discrimination, memory, etc., in order to build up an 
ideational control. Unconscious learning of segments which 
represent any degree of complexity is practically impossible. 

2. Two chronological stages were in evidence in the conscious 
part of the learning. The subject was guided in the first few 
trials by a general scheme of direction, gained when the exit was 
attained for the first time. He then found that in order to perfect 
his route a number of separate segments, presenting special prob- 
lems, must be studied. 

3. Difiiculties were offered mainly in the form of memory or of 
analysis and interpretation. A maze whose cul-de-sacs were sim- 
ple primarily taxed the memory; one in which the formations 
were intricate called for more active analysis. 

4. The immediate reaction upon the maze experience is per- 
ceptual in its nature, and simple formations are immediately 
and easily analyzed. A complex formation, on the other hand, 
calls for an interpretation of the difficult segment. It is in the 
elaboration of this interpretation that higher mental activities 
are elicited. 

5. The rational processes reported were unsystematic and seem- 
ingly futile. Adequate interpretations were suggested to the 
learner as the result of prolonged exploration, rather than rea- 
soned out. Cues which logically should be utilized for correct 
inferences were disregarded, and ideas were acted upon in an 
uncritical manner until they^ were proven by trial to be incorrect. 
The explanation of the meagre attempts at reasoning is to be 
found in the fact that the learner had no past experience to apply 



SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 9S 

to the situations, and in the fact that he was unable to select his 
data — maze paths must be traversed in order. 

B. Specific functions involved in the learning 

(a) Sensory discrimination: i. Sensory discrimination in the 
pencil mazes was made possible by, (a), the feeling of arm posi- 
tion; (b), the length and direction of arm movement, in any 
given run-way; (c), the sense of tactual projection, at the point 
of the pencil. 

2. A series of specific tests failed to warrant any assumption 
of correlation between ability to learn mazes and proficiency in 
sense discrimination. 

3. A number of supplementary tests proved that transference 
from one set of muscles to another is easily accomplished. That 
is, the left arm can be used without loss of efficiency after the 
right arm has been employed in the learning; and wrist and 
finger movement may be substituted for arm movement. 

4. While the physical technique called for in the "Mouse- 
trap" seemed radically different from that demanded in the 
pencil mazes, the learning process seemed to be essentially the 
same. The learning was perceptual and ideational, rather than 
sensory. 

(b) Imagery: i. The subjects represented a rather inclusive 
series of image types and combinations. Each individual em- 
ployed his peculiar image equipment for all mazes. 

2. Objective tests purporting to check up reports on imagery 
were in the main unsuccessful; they did however serve to con- 
vince the subject of the accuracy of his introspections on imagery. 

3. We were unable to make any correlation between the type or 
combination of image processes used with efficiency in maze 
learning. In addition to the absence of obvious correlation, the 
fact that different subjects used the same form of imagery in 
different ways made comparison impossible. 

4. Some reports were found which indicated that those relying 
upon kinaesthetic image processes tended to rely more upon 
motor habit than the other subjects. 

(c) Attention and Habit: i. Attention, in learning any maze. 



96 F. A. C. PERRIN 

was distributed in a three-fold way: it was concerned with, (a), 
the actual experience while traversing any section; (b), the 
"trail behind"; (c), an anticipation of the turns to come. This, 
roughly speaking, represented a chronological sequence during 
the learning of a maze. 

2. To the extent that the subject was able to disregard the im- 
mediate experiences, he tended to rely upon habit to carry him 
through the passages. 

3. Habit appeared early in the trials, with the pencil mazes, in 
connection with the segments first learned, while other segments 
were requiring study. Complete automaticity was not reported 
for an entire trial with any subject. 

(d) Memory: i. Memorizing was recognized as the chief 
difficulty only in connection with the simple mazes ; with the other 
mazes, the difficulty was one of analysis. 

2. Experiments designed to test the ability to memorize — i.e., 
with intricate maze paths lacking cul-de-sacs — failed to establish 
correlation of ability to memorize with proficiency in learning 
actual mazes. 

3. In addition to the difficulty of retaining knowledge just ac- 
quired, while actually traversing a maze, some of the subjects 
complained that the intervals between trials — in Experiment I — 
were too long. The reports indicated that an equal distribution 
of interval time is not necessarily the most efficient distribution. 

(e) Illusions: i. In practically all the mazes, relative lengths 
of passages, and the size of angles, were wrongly estimated. 
Not only were the proportions distorted, but the size of the maze 
as a whole was generally over-estimated. This was especially 
in evidence with the "Mouse-trap." 

2, Illusions were not as a rule productive of bad results, inas- 
much as they did not disturb the notion of the turn sequences. 
In one or two cases, however, a different estimation of the length 
of a passage from the one usually made suggested to the learner 
that he was astray, and errors resulted. 

C. The learning method 
I. A certain amount of active memorizing was necessary in 



SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 97 

order to learn the simplest mazes, and a genuine study of maze 
situations was called for in the complex mazes. 

2. The nature of the mental effort depended upon the complex- 
ity of the maze, not upon the volition of the learner. The learner 
was able to vary the temporal distribution of his effort to some 
extent. 

3. Pure "trial and error" and "pure" reasoning, or even "idea- 
tional learning," are equally inadequate terms to characterize the 
leaning method. 

D. The learning curves 

1. The obvious features of the curves were, (a), the rapid 
initial descent; (b), the steeples. 

2. Two factors enter into the explanation of the initial descent : 
First, a maze whose cul-de-sacs are intricate necessitates an elabo- 
rate expenditure of time in learning to avoid entering the cul-de- 
sac openings. Secondly, in any maze, the notion of the relation 
of exit to entrance, and the general idea of the course of the true 
path, acquired in the first trial, enable the subject to eliminate 
purely random "try-outs," and thus to center his activities. 

3. Steeples are associated with the second phase of the learning, 
in which specific problems are attacked — these problems call for 
systematic exploration, etc., which temporarily prolongs the time. 
Steeples are also due to carelessness, over-reliance upon habit, etc. 



'/ 



